Thread: Medicaid and Immigration

http://kff.org/medicaid/state-indica...t-as-a-of-pop/

Medicaid Enrollment as a Percent of Total Population

Location	Medicaid Enrollment as % of Total Pop
United States	21%
Alabama	21%
Alaska	18%
Arizona	24%
Arkansas	25%
California	31%
Colorado	12%1
Connecticut	20%
Delaware	25%
District of Columbia	35%
Florida	20%
Georgia	19%
Hawaii	19%
Idaho	15%1
Illinois	22%
Indiana	19%
Iowa	18%
Kansas	14%
Kentucky	21%
Louisiana	27%
Maine	31%
Maryland	17%
Massachusetts	26%
Michigan	23%
Minnesota	18%
Mississippi	26%
Missouri	18%1
Montana	13%
Nebraska	15%
Nevada	13%
New Hampshire	13%
New Jersey	12%
New Mexico	28%
New York	29%
North Carolina	19%1
North Dakota	12%
Ohio	20%
Oklahoma	23%
Oregon	17%
Pennsylvania	19%
Rhode Island	21%
South Carolina	20%
South Dakota	16%
Tennessee	24%
Texas	19%
Utah	13%
Vermont	31%
Virginia	13%
Washington	20%
West Virginia	22%1
Wisconsin	22%
Wyoming	15%

May 14, 2014

15 states with the highest share of immigrants in their population

By Jens Manuel Krogstad and Michael Keegan

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank...ir-population/

Excerpt: (Click on link for chart of all states)

A sharp rise in the number of immigrants living in the U.S. in recent decades serves as a backdrop for the debate in Congress over the nation’s immigration policies. In 1990, the U.S. had 19.8 million immigrants. That number rose to a record 40.7 million immigrants in 2012, among them 11.7 million unauthorized immigrants. Over this period, the number of immigrants in the U.S. increased more than five times as much as the U.S.-born population (106.1% versus 19.3%), according to a Pew Research Center analysis of Census Bureau data. As a result, from 1990 to 2012, the share of immigrants in the entire U.S. increased from 7.9% in 1990 to 13.0% in 2012.
Today there are four states in which about one-in-five or more people are foreign born—California, New York, New Jersey and Florida. By contrast, in 1990, California was the only state to have more than a fifth of its population born outside the U.S.

There's no question the only role of amnesty as Obama plans today is to bankrupt the United States with increased poverty by importation of persons both through unenforced illegal immigration as well as excess legal immigration. The national debt is already approaching $18 Trillion, a debt Americans can never repay unless we reverse the policies that caused this disaster. Congresswoman Sanchez may appear on CNN today bragging about how rich her state of California is and make the false statement that immigration is responsible for that when the simple fact is that while California may have a great deal of wealth, it still ranks the first in immigration of the 50 states and first in poor people on Medicaid, tied with Maine and Vermont. New York brags similarly ranking second in immigration of the 50 states and second in the number of poor people on Medicaid. As we know, when you have a population on Medicaid, they are also on other government assistance as well including free school lunch, subsidized housing, food stamps, charity and so forth.

For facts go here: http://cis.org/immigrant-welfare-use-2011

Excerpt:

Welfare Use by Immigrant Households with Children

A Look at Cash, Medicaid, Housing, and Food Programs

By Steven A. Camarota April 2011

Thirteen years after welfare reform, the share of immigrant-headed households (legal and illegal) with a child (under age 18 using at least one welfare program continues to be very high. 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. The major welfare programs examined in this report include cash assistance, food assistance, Medicaid, and public and subsidized housing.
Among the findings:

• In 2009 (based on data collected in 2010), 57 percent of households headed by an immigrant (legal and illegal) with children (under 18 used at least one welfare program, compared to 39 percent for native households with children.
  
• Immigrant households’ use of welfare tends to be much higher than natives for food assistance programs and Medicaid. Their use of cash and housing programs tends to be similar to native households.
• A large share of the welfare used by immigrant households with children is received on behalf of their U.S.-born children, who are American citizens. But even households with children comprised entirely of immigrants (no U.S.-born children) still had a welfare use rate of 56 percent in 2009.
• Immigrant households with children used welfare programs at consistently higher rates than natives, even before the current recession. In 2001, 50 percent of all immigrant households with children used at least one welfare program, compared to 32 percent for natives.
• Households with children with the highest welfare use rates are those headed by immigrants from the Dominican Republic (82 percent), Mexico and Guatemala (75 percent), and Ecuador (70 percent). Those with the lowest use rates are from the United Kingdom (7 percent), India (19 percent), Canada (23 percent), and Korea (25 percent).
• The states where immigrant households with children have the highest welfare use rates are Arizona (62 percent); Texas, California, and New York (61 percent); Pennsylvania (59 percent); Minnesota and Oregon (56 percent); and Colorado (55 percent).
• We estimate that 52 percent of households with children headed by legal immigrants used at least one welfare program in 2009, compared to 71 percent for illegal immigrant households with children. Illegal immigrants generally receive benefits on behalf of their U.S.-born children.
• Illegal immigrant households with children primarily use food assistance and Medicaid, making almost no use of cash or housing assistance. In contrast, legal immigrant households tend to have relatively high use rates for every type of program.
• High welfare use by immigrant-headed households with children is partly explained by the low education level of many immigrants. Of households headed by an immigrant who has not graduated high school, 80 percent access the welfare system, compared to 25 percent for those headed by an immigrant who has at least a bachelor’s degree.
• An unwillingness to work is not the reason immigrant welfare use is high. The vast majority (95 percent) of immigrant households with children had at least one worker in 2009. But their low education levels mean that more than half of these working immigrant households with children still accessed the welfare system during 2009.
• If we exclude the primary refugee-sending countries, the share of immigrant households with children using at least one welfare program is still 57 percent.
• Welfare use tends to be high for both new arrivals and established residents. In 2009, 60 percent of households with children headed by an immigrant who arrived in 2000 or later used at least one welfare program; for households headed by immigrants who arrived before 2000 it was 55 percent.
• For all households (those with and without children), the use rates were 37 percent for households headed by immigrants and 22 percent for those headed by natives.
• Although most new legal immigrants are barred from using some welfare for the first five years, this provision has only a modest impact on household use rates because most immigrants have been in the United States for longer than five years; the ban only applies to some programs; some states provide welfare to new immigrants with their own money; by becoming citizens immigrants become eligible for all welfare programs; and perhaps most importantly, the U.S.-born children of immigrants (including those born to illegal immigrants) are automatically awarded American citizenship and are therefore eligible for all welfare programs at birth.
• The eight major welfare programs examined in this report are SSI (Supplemental Security Income for low income elderly and disabled), TANF (Temporary Assistance to Needy Families), WIC (Women, Infants, and Children food program), free/reduced school lunch, food stamps (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program), Medicaid (health insurance for those with low incomes), public housing, and rent subsidies.

Introduction


Concern that immigrants may become a burden on society has been a long-standing issue in the United States. As far back as colonial times there were restrictions on the arrival of people who might become a burden on the community. This report analyzes survey data collected by the Census Bureau from 2002 to 2009 to examine use of welfare programs by immigrant and native households, particularly those with children. The Current Population Survey (CPS) asks respondents about their use of welfare programs in the year prior to the survey,¹ so we are examining self-reported welfare use rates from 2001 to 2009. The findings show that more than half of immigrant-headed households with children use at least one major welfare program, compared to about one-third of native-headed households. The primary reason immigrant households with children tend to have higher overall rates is their much higher use of food assistance programs and Medicaid; use of cash assistance and housing programs tends to be very similar to native households.


Why Study Immigrant Welfare Use?


Use of welfare programs by immigrants is important for two primary reasons. First, it is one measure of their impact on American society. If immigrants have high use rates it could be an indication that they are creating a net fiscal burden for the country. Welfare programs comprise a significant share of federal, and even state, expenditures. Total costs for the programs examined in this study were $517 billion in fiscal year 2008.² Moreover, those who receive welfare tend to pay little or no income tax. If use of welfare programs is considered a problem and if immigrant use of those programs is thought to be high, then it is an indication that immigration or immigrant policy needs to be a adjusted. Immigration policy is concerned with the number of immigrants allowed into the country and the selection criteria used for admission. It is also concerned with the level of resources devoted to controlling illegal immigration. Immigrant policy, on the other hand, is concerned with how we treat immigrants who are legally admitted to the country, such as welfare eligibility, citizenship requirements, and assimilation efforts.


The second reason to examine welfare use is that it can provide insight into how immigrants are doing in the United States. Accessing welfare programs can be seen as an indication that immigrants are having a difficult time in the United States. Or perhaps that some immigrants are assimilating into the welfare system. Thus, welfare use is both a good way of measuring immigration’s impact on American society and immigrants’ adaptation to life in the United States.

Methodology


The information for this Backgrounder is drawn from the public-use files of the CPS. We use the CPS beginning in 2002 because in that year the survey was redesigned and re-weighted by the Census Bureau, including additional questions about use of welfare programs. The survey identifies what the Census Bureau describes as the native-born and foreign-born populations. The foreign-born are defined as persons living in the United States who were not U.S. citizens at birth. In this report we use the terms foreign-born and immigrant synonymously. Immigrants or the foreign-born include naturalized American citizens, legal permanent residents (green card holders), illegal immigrants, and people on long-term temporary visas such as students or guest workers. It does not include those born abroad of American parents or those born in outlying territories of the United States, such as Puerto Rico, who are considered U.S.-born or native-born. We also use the terms native, native-born, and U.S.-born synonymously. Prior research indicates that Census Bureau data like the CPS capture the overwhelming majority of both legal and illegal immigrants. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Office of Immigration Statistics estimates that the undercount of immigrants in Census Bureau data is about 5.5 percent. Most of this undercount is of the illegal immigrant population. The undercount of illegal immigrants specifically is thought by DHS to be 10 percent.³

The CPS collected in March of each year oversamples minorities and is considered one of the best sources of information on immigrants. The March CPS is also referred to as the Annual Social and Economic Supplement of the Current Population Survey (ASES). The ASES includes questions on use of major welfare programs and is one of the only sources of information available on differences in immigrant and native use of welfare programs. When we examine use rates by state we combine two years of data (e.g., 2009 and 2010) to get more statistically robust estimates for smaller states.


The eight major welfare programs examined in this report are SSI (Supplemental Security Income for low income elderly and disabled), TANF (Temporary Assistance to Needy Families), WIC (Women, Infants, and Children food program), free/reduced school lunch, food stamps (now called Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program), Medicaid (health insurance for those with low incomes), public housing, and rent subsidies.⁴ These programs constitute the core of the nation’s welfare system.

Continued in link.

The sucking sound of services meant for US citizens going to illegal foreign nationals that are having children as a job.
Thanks for posting Judy.

Originally Posted by Newmexican

The sucking sound of services meant for US citizens going to illegal foreign nationals that are having children as a job.
Thanks for posting Judy.

You're most welcome Newmexican.

http://www.alipac.us/f12/5-east-coas...aliens-314647/

. . . Five East Coast states—Florida, Maryland, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Virginia—were among those where the numbers of unauthorized immigrants grew from 2009 to 2012. Totals also rose in Idaho and Nebraska, according to the center’s estimates.

“In the eastern states were the numbers went up it was due to non-Mexicans almost entirely,” said Jeffrey Passel, a senior demographer at Pew and one of the report's authors. “The destinations where immigrants chose to go are where they can find jobs and where they have families and friends.”

Passel said the growth in those states is mostly the result of immigrants from Central America, Asia, Europe and the Caribbean.

Six Western states—Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico and Oregon—were among those with declines in unauthorized immigrant populations from 2009 to 2012. Other states with decreases over that period are in the South (Alabama, Georgia and Kentucky), the Midwest (Illinois, Indiana and Kansas) and the Northeast (Massachusetts and New York). . .

Originally Posted by JohnDoe2

http://www.alipac.us/f12/5-east-coas...aliens-314647/

. . . Five East Coast states—Florida, Maryland, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Virginia—were among those where the numbers of unauthorized immigrants grew from 2009 to 2012. Totals also rose in Idaho and Nebraska, according to the center’s estimates.

“In the eastern states were the numbers went up it was due to non-Mexicans almost entirely,” said Jeffrey Passel, a senior demographer at Pew and one of the report's authors. “The destinations where immigrants chose to go are where they can find jobs and where they have families and friends.”

Passel said the growth in those states is mostly the result of immigrants from Central America, Asia, Europe and the Caribbean.

Six Western states—Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico and Oregon—were among those with declines in unauthorized immigrant populations from 2009 to 2012. Other states with decreases over that period are in the South (Alabama, Georgia and Kentucky), the Midwest (Illinois, Indiana and Kansas) and the Northeast (Massachusetts and New York). . .

But as of July 2013, immigration, illegal and legal, reached record numbers according to the Center for Immigration Studies:

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/...ia-africa-lead

Immigrant Population Reaches Record 41.3M; Middle East, Asia, Africa Lead Growth


September 25, 2014 - 9:42 AM

(CNSNews.com) – A new report from the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) released on Thursday shows that the number of immigrants living in the United States – legal and illegal -- reached a record 41.3 million as of July 2013, and the fasting growing immigrant population are from the Middle East, Asia and Africa.
According to the report, the regions with the largest increases of immigrants to the U.S. from 2010 to 2013 were South Asia (up 373,000, 16 percent growth); East Asia (up 365,000, 5 percent growth); the Caribbean (up 223,000, 6 percent growth), the Middle East (up 208,000, 13 percent growth); and sub-Saharan Africa (up 177,000, 13 percent growth).


“The new data makes clear that while Latin America and the Caribbean are still a significant source of immigration, the growth is being driven in large part by immigration from Asia, the Middle East, and Africa,” Steven Camarota, director of research at CIS and lead author of the report, said.


The report, using newly released data from the U.S. Census Bureau, reveals the nation’s immigrant population (legal and illegal) grew by 1.4 million from July 2010 to July 2013. The immigrant population, referred to as the foreign-born by the Census Bureau, includes all those who were not U.S. citizens at birth, including illegal immigrants.


Other findings in the report include:


• The sending countries with the largest increases 2010 to 2013 were India (up 254,000, 14 percent growth); China (up 217,000, 10 percent growth); the Dominican Republic (up 112,000, 13 percent growth); Guatemala (up 71,000, 9 percent growth); Jamaica (up 55,000, 8 percent growth); Bangladesh (up 49,000, 32 percent growth); Saudi Arabia (up 44,000, 97 percent growth); Pakistan (up 43,000, 14 percent growth); and Iraq (up 41,000, 26 percent growth).


• As a share of the total population, immigrants (legal and illegal) comprised 13.1 percent of U.S. residents (about one out of every eight), the highest percentage in 93 years. As recently as 1980, 6.2 percent of the population was comprised of immigrants.


• States where the number of immigrants grew the most since 2010 were Texas (up 227,240); California (up 160,771); Florida (up 140,019); New York (up 85,699); New Jersey (up 81,192); Massachusetts (up 62,591); Washington (up 57,402); Pennsylvania (up 57,091); Illinois (up 47,609); Arizona (up 39,647); Maryland (up 38,555); Virginia (up 37,844); North Carolina (up 30,289); Michigan (up 29,039); and Georgia (up 28,020).


• States with the largest percentage increase since 2010 were North Dakota (up 27 percent); West Virginia (up 17 percent); and Wyoming (up 14 percent). In South Dakota, Nebraska, and Idaho the immigrant population increased 10 percent. It grew 8 percent in New Hampshire, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania and 7 percent in Iowa, Delaware, and Minnesota.


The data show that the largest immigrant population is from Mexico, with an estimated 11.6 million legal and illegal immigrants living in the United States in 2013.


The number of immigrants from Mexico, however, fell by one percent from 2010 to 2013, according to the report. The number of European immigrants also declined over that time period.

It should be noted that with regards to the Mexican population drop of 1% over the 3 year period that the administrative actions to legalize illegal aliens account for far more than the 1% which is only 116,000, because the Executive Branch has already legalized far more than that number since 2010. According to NEWSWEEK, the Times reported that the number is already 600,000 just to the DACA'ers, the majority of which will be Mexicans simply because they are the majority of illegal aliens, and the majority of these will be in California.

The administration is also considering expanding DACA, the 2012 program that has thus far granted reprieve to about 600,000 “Dreamers,” undocumented young people brought to the U.S. as children. By tweaking age and educational requirements, for example, the White House could expand the program to an additional 700,000 people, the Times reported.

http://www.newsweek.com/coming-soon-...ncement-285463