No, they won’t boost the economy. The whole idea is a myth! The only boost I can see is that the local economy might benefit from the welfare dollars and other federal government supported programs to build low income housing (boodle for local developers!) and to give immigrants special loans to start businesses (that aren’t offered to low-income Americans)—dollars that arrive in the struggling cities from Washington. Oh, and of course (almost forgot) bring in cheap labor to satisfy big business and the Chambers of Commerce.
Wealth redistribution?
Washington doesn’t grow money on trees—it is just your money being recycled for the benefit of the expanding immigrant population and the Left-leaning local governments. This article reminded me of Nancy Pelosi. Do you remember when she famously said an expanding food stamp program helped the economy? She is essentially saying that the government needs to take your tax dollars and redistribute them to immigrants and then your money enters the economy of these struggling cities.
Leo Hohmann atWorld Net Dailyfeatures Baltimore Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake as his opening ‘star’ of the story. We told you about Rawlings-Blake here on Sunday.
Hohmann found this list of 100 cities vying for your money (collected by the IRS in Washington and doled out to myriad local welfare programs and through grants to state and local governments and to non-profits). Please look at this list! Is your city on it?
Hohmann goes on to report on the 18 mayors looking for a large allotment of Syrian refugees.
….a coalition of 100 immigrant-supporting cities seem to be in competition with each other to see which city can offer the most services and benefits to attract foreign-born residents.
They help them find jobs, overcome language barriers and work around employers’ demands for birth certificates or drivers’ licenses. There are also grants to help them get set up in a business venture.
So it’s no surprise that Rawlings-Blake is one of the 100 U.S. mayors asking the Obama administration to send her city a fresh wave of Syrian refugees. She is one of 18 mayors who have written a letter to the administration expressing their desire for more refugees. The 18 mayors who signed the letter represent a total of 100 mayors with Cities United for Immigration Action.
Continue reading(almost 1,000 comments in less than 24 hours). Hohmann reports some very good research by the Center for Immigration Studies on welfare use by immigrants, and he quotes me saying that this whole notion of boosting a local economy makes no logical sense if you include all the COSTS associated with the resettlement of third worlders and if you take out the federal taxpayers’ contribution.
This is short and sweet (well, maybe not so sweet). Reader Brenda is trying to figure out what is going on in her state and came across this document from the Department of Health and Human Services that sure looks like the welfare needs of refugees are being met by dipping into resources meant for Americans in poverty. Click here, and then see if you can find out if this is going on where you live.
When the Refugee Act of 1980 was passed by Congress, a promise was made that the refugees would not simply bring more poverty to America, but that is exactly what is happening. Refugees should not be part of our combating poverty programs!
I wanted to see where the most homeless US military veterans are located and found this map. Fascinating! Most of the largest refugee resettlement states correlate with the states that have the greatest number of homeless veterans—NY, FL, TX and CA. See map!
Americans first!
WASHINGTON, DC (September 10, 2015) — Low levels of education — not legal status — are the main reason immigrant welfare use is high, according to a new report by the Center for Immigration Studies. The report estimates welfare use separately for legal and illegal immigrant households based on Census Bureau data, and is a companion to the Center’s study released last week examining all immigrant households. The new analysis shows that legal immigrant households make extensive use of most welfare programs, while illegal immigrant households primarily benefit from food programs and Medicaid through U.S.-born children.
“Welfare use by illegal immigrant households is certainly a concern, but the bigger issue is welfare use by legal immigrants,” said Steven Camarota, the Center’s Director of Research and author of the report. “Three-fourths of immigrant households using welfare are headed by legal immigrants. Legal immigration is supposed to benefit the country, yet so many legal immigrants are not able to support themselves or their children. This raises important questions about the selection criteria used for legal immigration.”
~An estimated 49 percent of households headed by legal immigrants used one or more welfare programs in 2012, compared to 30 percent of households headed by natives.
~Households headed by legal immigrants have higher use rates than native households overall and for cash programs (14 percent vs. 10 percent), food programs (36 percent vs. 22 percent), and Medicaid (39 percent vs. 23 percent). Use of housing programs is similar.
~Legal immigrant households account for three-quarters of all immigrant households accessing one or more welfare programs.
~Of legal immigrant households with children, 72 percent access one or more welfare programs, compared to 52 percent of native households.
~Of households headed by immigrants in the country illegally, we estimate that 62 percent used one or more welfare programs in 2012, compared to 30 percent of native households.
~Households headed by immigrants illegally in the country have higher use rates than native households overall and for food programs (57 percent vs. 22 percent) and Medicaid (51 percent vs. 23 percent). Use of cash programs by illegal immigrants is lower than use by natives (5 percent vs. 10 percent), as is use of housing programs (4 percent vs. 6 percent).
~Of illegal immigrant households with children, 87 percent access one or more welfare programs, compared to 52 percent of native households.
~There is a worker present in 85 percent of legal immigrant-headed households and 95 percent of illegal immigrant-headed households. But while most immigrant households have a worker, many are less-educated, earn low wages, and are thus eligible for welfare.
~Education level plays a larger role in explaining welfare use than legal status. The most extensive use of welfare is by less-educated immigrants who are in the country legally. Of households headed by legal immigrants without a high school diploma, 75 percent use one or more welfare programs, as do 64 percent of households headed by legal immigrants with only a high school education.
~The overwhelming majority of illegal immigrants have modest levels of education; therefore, the high use of welfare associated with less-educated legal immigrants indicates that legalization would likely increase welfare costs, particularly for cash and housing programs.
~Restrictions on new legal immigrants’ access to welfare have not prevented them from accessing programs at high rates because restrictions often apply to only a modest share of immigrants at any one time. Some programs are not restricted, there are numerous exceptions and exemptions, and some provisions are entirely unenforced. Equally important, immigrants, including those illegally in the country, can receive welfare on behalf of their U.S.-born children.
# # #
Be sure to see CIS’s previous announcementabout how immigrants of all kinds use welfare at a higher rate than native born Americans.
Refugees!
For readers who are researching the Refugee Resettlement Program, go here for annual reports to Congress which contain information about welfare use by refugees.
In themost recent year (2013) available, note that on page 101, refugees are using public assistance at a much higher rate than other LEGAL immigrants shown in the table above. Remember it is the contractor’s job to get their ‘clients’ (refugees) signed up for “services.” Refugees thus benefit to a greater degree than other legal immigrants partly because you pay a supposed non-profit to guide them through the process of signing them up for their welfare benefits.
21% of refugees are using SSI
56% are using Medicaid
74% are getting food stamps (SNAP)
23% are in public housing or subsidized housing
This post is filed in our categories ‘where to find information‘ and‘refugee statistics.’
Oops! Forgot to mention that the whole premise of the Refugee Act of 1980 (Ted Kennedy and Joe Biden) was that refugees were to be self-sufficient very quickly, they were not meant to be a burden on the taxpayer—so much for that promise!
Longtime readers know we have closely followed the controversy in Maine (archive here) where the state had gained a reputation around the country (and probably the third-world) as the state to go to and apply for asylum. Why? Because even as federal law does not say asylum seekers can get welfare during their wait for the legal process to play out, Maine was giving hand-outs to the “undocumented.”
Paul LePage for President? (That little book he is holding is the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution published by the Heritage Foundation.)
Republican Governor LePage vowed to reform Maine’s reputation as the go-to state for taxpayer-funded goodies and he was re-elected in blue New England.
And, btw, it was Maine’s generosity that attracted the first Somalis to Lewiston, Maine. See our entire Lewiston archive for the mess that created.
PORTLAND Maine (Reuters) – Maine’s largest city has begun clamping down on spending as newly re-elected Republican Governor Paul LePage makes good on a campaign promise to cut funding to cities and towns that give aid to undocumented immigrants.
In an internal memo released on Wednesday, Portland city officials said they had frozen hiring and cut travel and overtime spending after their requests for reimbursement from the state for assistance provided to families with children in emergencies had gone unanswered since July.
The budget shortfall could grow to as much as $3 million this year, city officials said, a hefty sum that underscores the increasingly local impact of the tense congressional standoff over national immigration reform.
“We just don’t have that kind of money sitting around, so we need to act prudently,” said city spokeswoman Jessica Grondin. “We’re in a holding pattern until we receive some kind of official response.”
Tea Party-backed LePage, who was re-elected last week with a strong mandate to reform the state’s welfare system, had threatened in June to cut funding to municipalities that give state-reimbursed general assistance to undocumented immigrants.
“Tell your city councilors and selectmen to stop handing out your money to illegals,” LePage said in a radio address.
Then take note of this next paragraph…..
“It basically came down as an edict from the governor,” said municipal association spokesman Eric Conrad. “How can you expect a municipal clerk to determine immigration status when they’ve never done that before, and haven’t been trained?”
Train them!
When I speak with people who know nothing about the immigration horrors going on in America, they are always stunned to learn that NO one EVER asks for documentation relating to immigration status—not colleges accepting students and collecting tuition, not welfare offices, not motor vehicle administration offices and not board of election offices. I know this from personal experience. If documentation were required it would cut down ultimately on the number of illegal aliens of all stripes living in America!
Now be sure to go to the Reuters story to see the comments! As of this writing there are 1,806—mostly supporting the Governor! And, some suggesting he run for President of the United States.
Update November 17th: Pamela Geller (Atlas Shrugs) reports on Wyoming, here. Washington, DC immigration lawyer whacks Wyomingites for not “welcoming” refugees.
It’s not for the jobs and the wide open spaces (or blanket-making lessons)!
They are going there to get subsidized Section 8 housing vouchers to take to another state!
***Update*** This post went through the roof yesterday, please help spread it further by sending to your lists, facebook friends and tweet it!
This is an incredible story and a great find by reader ‘pungentpeppers!’ After seven years of writing this blog I had no idea this was happening.
(See our earlier posts here and here about Somalis in Cheyenne.)
This is an NPR radio report at KQED that aired this past Wednesday. Here is the astounding transcript (but be sure to listen to the 3 minute story):
(Emphasis below is mine)
In the last few years demand for public housing assistance across the country has skyrocketed, while congressional funding has stayed flat
Cheyenne Housing Authority Director Mike Stanfield: That housing money was meant for local people.
Right now federal funds covers less than a fourth of families in the United States eligible for a Section 8 housing voucher. Waitlists for voucher in big cities are often years long, if not closed all together. As Wyoming Public Radio’s Miles Bryan reports that made small cities like Cheyenne more attractive to those seeking housing aid, because of shorter wait times.
Tuesday night is when Cheyenne’s Somali community gets together at the Free Evangelical Church to catch up and socialize. Its usually busy but tonight is packed: church volunteers have subbed out the regular english classes for a special lesson in blanket making. (Yeh, who needs English anyway—ed)
Cheyenne’s Somali population has grown rapidly in the last couple of years. That’s surprising because Wyoming doesn’t have an official refugee resettlement program, and most jobs around here require fluent English.
But Cheyenne has one really big draw: housing assistance.
Faiso Abdi moved to Cheyenne last year. She says she was happy living in Greeley Colorado, but she couldn’t even get on the waitlist for that city’s section 8 housing voucher program.
“The real problem is that people are desperate for the housing subsidy and they are willing to do almost anything to get one.”
Cheyenne’s voucher wait list runs almost a year, but many bigger cities like Greeley have simply stopped accepting new applicants entirely. But here’s the thing: getting your housing voucher in Cheyenne doesn’t mean you have to use it there. Organizer Gretchen Carlson says what’s called “portability” is a big draw.
“There are quite a few of them that have already lived here one year and then have moved elsewhere. But they lived here for one year in order to get that voucher.”
Housing voucher money is distributed city by city, but it all comes from the Feds, and they say that every housing voucher eventually has to become portable, or transferrable to any city in the US. Cities can decide whether to let you port your voucher immediately or require you to wait a year. So if you can’t get a housing voucher in say, Denver, you can get one in Cheyenne and, a year later, take it with you back to Denver.
“The frustration is that pot of money was provided to address housing needs here in Wyoming.”
That’s Mike Stanfield, Executive Director of the Cheyenne Housing Authority. When people take vouchers out of Cheyenne the receiving housing authority can chose to absorb the cost or keep billing Cheyenne. Stanfield says lately Cheyenne has been footing the bill more and more often. And while the average cost for a Cheyenne voucher is only about 400 dollars.
“The average cost for a ported voucher that moves somewhere else is 733 dollars.”
Now Cheyenne Housing Authority oversees about 1700 vouchers, with another 1400 families on the waitlist. Only about 70 voucher are currently ported out. Stanfield says that may not seem like much, but there are Cheyenne families on the waiting list who need help now.
“And when they are told that waiting list is 12 to 18 months that is almost beyond comprehension for those families. They are struggling trying to get to tomorrow. Let alone 18 months from now.”
Susan Popkin is a Fellow at the Urban Institute. She says portability is not a problem.
“The real problem is that people are desperate for the housing subsidy and they are willing to do almost anything to get one.”
Popkin says portability is a vital part of the system: it means families don’t have to pass up a better job somewhere else just to keep their housing. She says what’s happening in Cheyenne is a just one symptom of the overwhelming need for housing help across the United States.
“Things that used to be ‘oh well, we can handle it’ ten, fifteen years ago–they just they can’t anymore.”
In Cheyenne Housing Authority Director Mike Stanfield has decided he can’t handle the outflow of housing funds anymore. Recently he began a policy of giving preference for housing vouchers to Cheyenne locals.
Wait for it! Can we expect CAIR to ride to the rescue of the Somali Muslims in Cheyenne?
See all of our coverage of the conflict involving Governor Matt Meadgoing on for a year now about whether Wyoming should become the last state in the nation to directly “welcome” the third world to come on in—our welfare is great!
And, those resettlement contractors dare to tell us that refugees bring economic benefits to communities when, in fact, they are taking from American low income people!
