Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

The Poverty Reduction Success of Public Transfers For Working Age Immigrants and Refugees In the United States Christopher R. Bollinger Paul Hagstrom University.

Published byPaula Reed Modified over 8 years ago

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "The Poverty Reduction Success of Public Transfers For Working Age Immigrants and Refugees In the United States Christopher R. Bollinger Paul Hagstrom University."— Presentation transcript:

1 The Poverty Reduction Success of Public Transfers For Working Age Immigrants and Refugees In the United States Christopher R. Bollinger Paul Hagstrom University of Kentucky Hamilton College We thank Lindsay Allen for excellent research assistance. Author Bollinger thanks the University of Kentucky Center for Poverty Research for supporting this project.

2 Refugees/Immigrants/PRWORA Prior to PRWORA, all legal permanent residents were eligible for Food Stamp, AFDC, Medicaid and SSI. PRWORA Denied these program benefits to immigrants in general. Refugees, however, are eligible for the first 5 years they are in the US (and then eligible if they are citizens).

3 Previous Research Program declines among immigrants and refugees (Fix and Passell, 2002; Lofstrom and Bean, 2003; Borjas, 2002; Haider,2004; Bollinger and Hagstrom, 2006) Earnings and Assimilation (Borjas, 1987, 1990, 1994; Kosoudji, 1989; Aguilar and Gustafsson, 1991; Reitz, 1998; Galster et al 1999; Card et al. 2000; Butcher and DiNardo, 2002; Longva and Raaum, 2002) Poverty Rates (Lee, 1994; Ley and Smith, 1997; Clark 1998) Previous research often ignored refugees or only used crude measures (country of origin). Exception Bollinger and Hagstrom, food stamps, refugees are different.

4 Measuring Refugee Status No large public use cross sectional data sets have refugee status and income. CPS has detailed information on Income and Immigrant status (including country of origin and year of entry) Census of Legal Permanent Residents has refugee status, country of origin, year of entry, gender, and age at entry.

5 Methodology Calculate refugee probability from Census of LPR: age and age squared by country of origin, year of immigration and gender. Use model from Census to predict refugee probability in CPS. Use these probabilities for weighted averages and in likelihood functions for probits and other models (like 2 sample IV).

6 Poverty Measures Standard Poverty Threshold Used for all Private Income: Only private income sources such as earnings, investment income, private transfers (alimony, child support, pensions). Official Measure: Private Income + social security + means tested cash transfers. Policy Income: Private Income net of all taxes (including EITC effect) and transfers (including food stamps, housing subsidies and school lunch).

7 Trends in Poverty Figure 1: Three Poverty Measures Using Full Sample

8 Poverty Rates AllNativeImmigrantsRefugees Pre 96Post 96 Pre 96Post 96 Pre96Post96Pre96Post96 Private17.7%15.7%17.2%15.3%21.7%18.5%28.7%20.9% Official12.9%11.4%12.5%11%16.6%14.7%22.1%15.5% Net12.0%10.1%11.6%9.8%15.6%12.9%20.1%13.5%

9 Basic ModelAdding Labor Market Adding Full Demographics a Local Unemployment0.0610***0.0491*** (0.0021)(0.0025) Post Reform-0.0670***0.01100.0107 (0.011)(0.013)(0.014) Immigrant0.144***0.153***0.383*** (0.016)(0.035)(0.040) Immigrant x Post Reform-0.0386*-0.0220-0.0494** (0.020)(0.022)(0.025) Immigrant x Local Unemployment -0.00528-0.0172*** (0.0045)(0.0050) Refugee0.356***0.0584-0.0888 (0.047)(0.13)(0.16) Refugee x Post Reform-0.270***-0.170**-0.163 (0.075)(0.087)(0.10) Refugee x Local Unemployment 0.0387**0.0582*** (0.017)(0.020) Constant-0.942***-1.353***-0.668*** (0.030)(0.033)(0.042) Observations293075 Standard errors in parentheses *** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1 All Models include year and state fixed effects. a. Demographics include the Head of Household, Spouse, and Household variables from Table 2. Table 4: Probit Estimation Results for Dependent Variable Private Poor Using Full Sample

10 Basic Model Adding Labor Market Adding Full Demographics a Local Unemployment0.0599***0.0442*** (0.0021)(0.0025) Post Reform-0.00783-0.003030.00307 (0.012) (0.014) Immigrant0.161***0.142***0.359*** (0.017)(0.034)(0.039) Immigrant x Post Reform0.006590.02720.00819 (0.021)(0.022)(0.025) Immigrant x Local Unemployment -0.00125-0.0154*** (0.0042)(0.0048) Refugee0.346***-0.0722-0.449*** (0.049)(0.13)(0.17) Refugee x Post Reform-0.320***-0.191**-0.148 (0.075)(0.085)(0.10) Refugee x Local Unemployment 0.0553***0.111*** (0.017)(0.021) Constant-1.231***-1.553***-0.932*** (0.031)(0.034)(0.043) Observations293075 Standard errors in parentheses. *** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1 All Models include year and state fixed effects. a. Demographics include the Head of Household, Spouse, and Household variables from Table 2. Table 5: Probit Estimation Results for Dependent Variable Officially Poor (Counted Income less than Poverty Threshold) Using Full Sample

11 Basic ModelAdding Labor Market Adding Full Demographics a Local Unemployment0.0560***0.0404*** (0.0022)(0.0025) Post Reform-0.00990-0.00407-0.0786*** (0.013) (0.014) Immigrant0.164***0.181***0.368*** (0.017)(0.035)(0.039) Immigrant x Post Reform-0.0103-0.000703-0.0169 (0.021)(0.022)(0.025) Immigrant x Local Unemployment -0.00610-0.0168*** (0.0043)(0.0049) Refugee0.298***-0.0280-0.230 (0.050)(0.13)(0.16) Refugee x Post Reform-0.267***-0.166*-0.140 (0.077)(0.086)(0.099) Refugee x Local Unemployment 0.0426**0.0670*** (0.017)(0.020) Constant-1.312***-1.615***-0.941*** (0.033)(0.035)(0.044) Observations293075 Standard errors in parentheses *** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1 All Models include year and state fixed effects. a. Demographics include the Head of Household, Spouse, and Household variables from Table 2. Table 6: Probit Estimation Results for Dependent Variable Net Poverty Using Full sample

12 Removed -OfficialBasic ModelAdding Labor Market Adding Full Demographics a Local Unemployment-0.0206-0.00706 (0.025)(0.027) Post Reform-0.0160-0.102-0.129 (0.025)(0.076)(0.079) Immigrant0.128***0.178***0.151*** (0.033)(0.045)(0.047) Immigrant x Post Reform0.111***0.0312***0.0224** (0.042)(0.0096)(0.0100) Immigrant x Local Unemployment -0.170-0.451 (0.24)(0.28) Refugee0.103-0.167-0.0843 (0.096)(0.16)(0.18) Refugee x Post Reform-0.269*0.03400.0979*** (0.15)(0.030)(0.037) Refugee x Local Unemployment 0.451***0.326***1.185*** (0.061)(0.066)(0.076) Constant48353 Table 7: Probit Estimation Results for Dependent Variable Removed from Official Poverty Using Private Poor Subsample

13 Removed-NetBasic ModelAdding Labor Market Adding Full Demographics Local Unemployment-0.0118-0.00697 (0.024) Post Reform-0.01240.07610.0532 (0.024)(0.067)(0.068) Immigrant0.106***0.05100.0451 (0.031)(0.041)(0.042) Immigrant x Post Reform0.04020.003260.00177 (0.039)(0.0082)(0.0083) Immigrant x Local Unemployment -0.0637-0.0301 (0.22)(0.23) Refugee0.00263-0.0945-0.0868 (0.088)(0.15)(0.16) Refugee x Post Reform-0.1210.007600.0177 (0.14)(0.026)(0.028) Refugee x Local Unemployment 0.121*0.794*** (0.064)(0.071) Constant48353 *** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1 All Models include year and state fixed effects. a. Demographics include the Head of Household, Spouse, and Household variables from Table 2. Table 7: Probit Estimation Results for Dependent Variable Removed from Net Poverty Using Private Poor Subsample

14 Conclusions Immigrants are more likely to be poor, refugees most likely. Policy, both pre- and post-reform appears to move refugees and immigrants out of poverty more effectively than native counterparts. Differences in poverty rates, in general, are due to differences in private sources of income rather than policy differentials.

Download ppt "The Poverty Reduction Success of Public Transfers For Working Age Immigrants and Refugees In the United States Christopher R. Bollinger Paul Hagstrom University."

Similar presentations

Impressionistic Realism European Measures of Income, Poverty and Social Exclusion David S. Johnson U.S. Census Bureau November 4, 2009.

Impressionistic Realism European Measures of Income, Poverty and Social Exclusion David S. Johnson U.S. Census Bureau November 4, 2009.
Ajay Chaudry, The Urban Institute The Demographics of Children in Immigrant Families The Demographics of Children in Immigrant Families “Immigrant Children:

Ajay Chaudry, The Urban Institute The Demographics of Children in Immigrant Families The Demographics of Children in Immigrant Families “Immigrant Children:
PAI786: Urban Policy Class 16: Welfare Programs and Principles of Welfare Policy.

PAI786: Urban Policy Class 16: Welfare Programs and Principles of Welfare Policy.
1 U.S. Poverty Trends: why has the official U.S. poverty rate been stuck at 11-16% since 1971 ? World Poverty and Economic Development ECON 3240 Fordham.

1 U.S. Poverty Trends: why has the official U.S. poverty rate been stuck at 11-16% since 1971 ? World Poverty and Economic Development ECON 3240 Fordham.
NYC’s Alternative Poverty Measure: The Need to Identify Unauthorized Immigrants Vicky Virgin Center for Migration Studies September 29, 2014.

NYC’s Alternative Poverty Measure: The Need to Identify Unauthorized Immigrants Vicky Virgin Center for Migration Studies September 29, 2014.
1 VITA at Colgate: The Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) VITA Presentation Nicole Simpson January 2013.

1 VITA at Colgate: The Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) VITA Presentation Nicole Simpson January 2013.
What Did the 1990s Welfare Reform Accomplish? Rebecca M. Blank December 2003 (A topic closely related to Gene Smolensky’s past research and concerns)

What Did the 1990s Welfare Reform Accomplish? Rebecca M. Blank December 2003 (A topic closely related to Gene Smolensky’s past research and concerns)
Overview of Income Redistribution Programs

Overview of Income Redistribution Programs
Antipoverty Effectiveness of Social Insurance Programs Today’s Reading Schiller Ch. 13-Social Insurance Programs DeParle, Ch. 18: A Shot at the American.

Antipoverty Effectiveness of Social Insurance Programs Today’s Reading Schiller Ch. 13-Social Insurance Programs DeParle, Ch. 18: A Shot at the American.
19. Income Distribution and Poverty Income Inequality in the U.S. Poverty in the U.S. Income Inequality in the U.S. Poverty in the U.S.

19. Income Distribution and Poverty Income Inequality in the U.S. Poverty in the U.S. Income Inequality in the U.S. Poverty in the U.S.
Overview of Federal and State Welfare Programs April 24, 2008.

Overview of Federal and State Welfare Programs April 24, 2008.
The Economic, Social, Civic and Fiscal Consequences of Dropping Out of High School: Findings for Connecticut Adults in the 21 st Century Andrew Sum Center.

The Economic, Social, Civic and Fiscal Consequences of Dropping Out of High School: Findings for Connecticut Adults in the 21 st Century Andrew Sum Center.
Chapter 12 Poverty, Welfare, and Women Poverty in the U.S. Welfare  programs  incentives  reform EITC Poverty in the U.S. Welfare  programs  incentives.

Chapter 12 Poverty, Welfare, and Women Poverty in the U.S. Welfare  programs  incentives  reform EITC Poverty in the U.S. Welfare  programs  incentives.
Poverty: Facts, Causes and Consequences Hilary Hoynes University of California, Davis California Symposium on Poverty October 2009.

Poverty: Facts, Causes and Consequences Hilary Hoynes University of California, Davis California Symposium on Poverty October 2009.
Urban Men In Poverty: Problems and Solutions Geoffrey L. Wallace La Follette School of Public Affairs Institute for Research on Poverty University of Wisconsin.

Urban Men In Poverty: Problems and Solutions Geoffrey L. Wallace La Follette School of Public Affairs Institute for Research on Poverty University of Wisconsin.
Welfare Programs Today’s readings: Schiller Ch 13, Welfare Programs House Ways and Means Committee 2004 Green Book,

Welfare Programs Today’s readings: Schiller Ch 13, Welfare Programs House Ways and Means Committee 2004 Green Book,
Regarding the income distribution in the United States, we have: 0 of 30 1. Too much inequality 2. Just the right amount of inequality 3. Not enough inequality.

Regarding the income distribution in the United States, we have: 0 of Too much inequality 2. Just the right amount of inequality 3. Not enough inequality.
Immigrant Legalization: Assessing the Labor Market Effects Magnus Lofstrom Laura Hill, Joseph Hayes.

Immigrant Legalization: Assessing the Labor Market Effects Magnus Lofstrom Laura Hill, Joseph Hayes.
Poverty, Welfare, and Women Chapter 12. Measuring Poverty Absolute Measure of Poverty –People living below a certain threshold Relative Income Poverty.

Poverty, Welfare, and Women Chapter 12. Measuring Poverty Absolute Measure of Poverty –People living below a certain threshold Relative Income Poverty.
1 Impact of Poverty Programs. Measuring the Impact of Poverty Programs One key question is how effective have all of our poverty programs been at alleviating.

1 Impact of Poverty Programs. Measuring the Impact of Poverty Programs One key question is how effective have all of our poverty programs been at alleviating.

Similar presentations

Ads by Google