The following excerpt from a Cato Institute report has been cited as proof that if illegal aliens were given amnesty they would not become a major drag on the nation\u2019s safety net. Cato is a libertarian, open borders advocacy group.<\/p>\n
\u201cIn reality, low-income non-citizen immigrants, including adults and children, are generally less likely to receive public benefits than those who are native-born. Moreover, when non-citizen immigrants receive benefits, the value of benefits they receive is usually lower than the value of benefits received by those born in the United States. The combination of lower average utilization and smaller average benefits indicates that the overall cost of public benefits is substantially less for low-income non-citizen immigrants than for comparable native-born adults and children.\u201d [Cato Institute, 2\/19\/13<\/a>]\n Low-income non-citizen immigrants are generally illegal aliens. That is the case because higher income non-citizen residents are either legal immigrants who do not yet have enough years of residence to become U.S. citizens or are long-term non-immigrants such as H-1B professional workers.<\/p>\n Illegal aliens are precluded by law from receiving public benefits, so it is a no-brainer that they are less likely to receive benefits than those who are native born.<\/p>\n What does CATO\u2019s claim prove about the potential effect if they received amnesty? It certainly doesn\u2019t mean that they would not become a public assistance burden in the future. If their status changed from illegal to legal, then they would be en route to qualifying for welfare benefits the same as legal immigrants. But, unlike those who come in with a visa, most illegal aliens have low levels of schooling, employment skills, and English proficiency \u2013 all factors shown by longitudinal studies to hold back employment progress. <\/p>\n The 1996 study for the U.S. Department of Labor that surveyed the 1986 amnesty recipients found that \u201c\u202634 percent of legalization families, as compared with 17 percent of families nationwide, lived on annual incomes of less than $15,000. Only 18 percent of legalization families, as compared with 59 percent of U.S. families, had incomes exceeding $30,000.\u201d That 1996 study did not include the two-fifths of the amnesty recipients who gained legal status through working in agriculture. Had they been included, the share with poverty level income would surely have been much higher. The $15,000 family income level if adjusted for inflation would be about the current poverty level for a family of four and much less than current entitlement levels to numerous social assistance programs. <\/p>\n