How does the Center for Immigration Studies define "welfare" in their statistics?

1. What CIS means by “welfare”: a means‑tested, anti‑poverty definition

CIS explicitly states it defines “welfare” as means‑tested anti‑poverty benefits, following the Census Bureau’s distinction between means‑tested programs and social insurance programs that are not means‑tested ^{[1] [2]}. That framing narrows CIS’s universe to programs where eligibility depends primarily on income or poverty status rather than age, work history, or veteran status, and is the baseline for the Center’s calculations ^[1].

2. Which programs CIS includes and how it groups them

In CIS’s breakdowns, “cash” benefits include Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), Supplemental Security Income (SSI), the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC), and state general assistance; “food” includes SNAP, WIC, and free/reduced school meals; housing assistance includes both subsidized and public housing; and CIS counts Medicaid as part of welfare spending comparisons ^{[2] [3]}. CIS uses those categories repeatedly in its reports and figures to compare immigrant and native households ^{[2] [3]}.

3. What CIS excludes: social insurance and non‑means‑tested programs

CIS says it excludes programs that the Census Bureau treats as social insurance — programs that are not means‑tested and are based on criteria like age or prior contributions (e.g., Social Security, Medicare) — from its “welfare” definition and analysis ^[1]. That exclusion is central to CIS’s methodological claim that it is limiting its measures to anti‑poverty supports rather than broader government transfers ^[1].

4. How the definition shapes CIS’s headline findings

Because CIS limits “welfare” to means‑tested anti‑poverty programs, its headline comparisons — for example, claims about immigrant households consuming more cash welfare, food assistance, and Medicaid dollars than native households — are driven by that program selection and categorization ^[3]. The choice of which programs to include (and which to exclude) directly affects reported differences between immigrant and native households ^[3].

5. Pushback and context about methodology and interpretation

Outside critics and other analysts have questioned CIS’s methods and interpretations in past work, arguing that program choice and statistical methods can change conclusions; for instance, critics have challenged CIS findings and said methodology mattered for earlier claims about immigrant welfare use ^[4]. CIS itself notes it follows Census Bureau definitions and uses the Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP) for much of its work, which it presents as a strength of accuracy ^{[1] [5]}.

6. Practical implications for policy and public debate

Because CIS adopts the Census Bureau’s means‑tested definition, its statistics are suited to debates focused specifically on low‑income, means‑tested supports (including public charge discussions noted by CIS), but they are not measures of all government transfers received by households — a crucial distinction for policymakers or readers who want a fuller fiscal picture that would include Social Security, Medicare, and other non‑means‑tested transfers ^{[1] [6]}.

7. What reporting does not say / open questions

Available sources do not mention CIS’s treatment of some borderline programs or state‑level variations in eligibility in detail in the snippets provided; they also do not provide a full program‑by‑program inclusion/exclusion list beyond the categories and examples CIS cites (not found in current reporting). For readers seeking a complete accounting, checking CIS’s full methods appendix on each report and comparing it to Census or independent analyses (e.g., CBO, CBPP, academic studies) would be necessary ^{[2] [5]}.

Summary: CIS defines “welfare” narrowly as means‑tested anti‑poverty benefits and lists specific program categories (cash, food, housing, Medicaid) while excluding social insurance programs; that definitional choice is central to understanding and critiquing its statistics ^{[1] [2] [3]}.