The pro-open border libertarian think tank, CATO has a serious problem with the Center for Immigration Reform’s study that claims immigrants take more welfare than native-born Americans.
CATO addressed flaws in the study’s methodology Thursday, claiming the “CIS study does not compare apples to apples but rather apples to elephants.”
CIS estimated welfare use among immigrants and native-born Americans by comparing their households. CATO claims that the think tank should have also categorized mixed households, where one spouse is a native-born American, and the other is an immigrant.
The libertarian think tank also took issue with the fact that CIS counted households over individuals, because households have varying sizes. The American Community Survey stated that immigrant households have on average 3.37 people in them compared to 2.5 people in native-born households.
CATO also claimed that their research shows while immigrants use welfare programs more frequently, they are also on for a shorter period of time, with fewer beneficiaries per household.
Alex Nowrasteh, who authored the article for CATO, said CIS also should have noted how much immigrants put into Social Security and Medicare.
Despite all their claims, CATO misses the big picture.
CIS could have added other expensive elements of social services like public education, hospitals, and prisons, but was only examining the Census Bureau’s Survey of Income and Program Participation.
“The last time American immigration laws were well enforced without a large-scale guest worker or legal entry program was during the Great Depression and World War II – when nobody wanted to come,” Nowrasteh wrote.
The truth is there were many illegal Mexican border crossings during the end of WWII leading President Eisenhower to issue Operation Wetback.
Many libertarians advocate for opening the border to end the welfare state, the problem is immigrants have culture they carry with them across borders, and in a democracy they have a right to instill those cultural beliefs into laws.
According to a Pew Hispanic study from 2012, immigrants from Latin America favor more government by a margin of 75 to 19 percent.
A politician could end the welfare state and open up the borders, but within a generation that free market, small government political ideology will be replaced with one that demands bigger government with more social services and less freedom.
