Immigrant Inclusion in the Safety Net: A Framework for Analysis and Effects on Educational Attainment

Abstract

Across states, there is substantial variation in the degree to which immigrants and their children are offered public assistance. We present a theoretical framework for analyzing the effects of policy decisions about immigrant inclusion. We apply the framework to investigate the effect of the state safety net on educational attainment. We focus on the years following welfare reform in 1996, when states gained considerable autonomy over welfare policy, including decisions about the eligibility of immigrant residents. Leveraging state‐level data from before and after reform, we estimate a difference‐in‐difference model to identify the effect of variation in immigrant inclusivity on educational attainment. We find that when states broaden the inclusivity of the social safety net to immigrants, young Latinos are more likely to graduate from high school. This effect is present beyond the group of Latino residents who receive additional benefits, suggesting that policy decisions about immigrants spill over to broader communities and communicate broader messages about social inclusion to racial and ethnic groups. We find similar patterns among Asian youth, but not among black and non‐Hispanic white youth. We conclude that immigrant inclusion has consequences for the life prospects of the growing population of youth in high‐immigrant ethnic groups.

Spillover Effects: Immigrant Policing and Government Skepticism in Matters of Health for Latinos

“…Corroborating this anecdote, literature on the “chilling effect” of immigrant policing shows that concerns among Latinos about immigrant policing are sufficiently acute to deter enrollment in health insurance (Fix and Passel ; Watson ), including Medicaid (Condon, Filindra, and Wichowsky ; Watson ) and, in some cases, to avoid health care providers (Beniflah et al ; Rhodes et al ; Toomey et al ). These studies note that concerns about immigrant policing extend beyond formal policy targets (i.e., undocumented immigrants) to broader publics (i.e., Latinos who are U.S. citizens).…”

“…that is obtained for the purposes of determining eligibility for [health insurance] coverage as the basis for pursuing civil immigration enforcement actions against such individuals or members of their household.” However, as one observer remarked, “[Latino families] hear [the President's] assurance, but because of the level of deportations that have happened, there's a lot of families that don't know whether they can trust that assurance” (Easley ). This example suggests that Latinos draw lessons from immigrant policing experiences that, in turn, inform their trust in government‐sponsored efforts to court potential health insurance enrollees (Condon, Filindra, and Wichowsky ; Cruz Nichols, LeBrón, and Pedraza , ; Fix and Passel ; Pedraza, Cruz Nichols, and LeBrón ; Watson ).…”

“…What about differences within a group? Scholars are increasingly attentive to the importance of nativity as a cleavage that defines who is deserving of public investments and who is not (Condon, Filindra, and Wichowsky ; Fox ). From the perspective of the policy inclusion effects (PIE) framework developed by Condon, Filindra, and Wichowsky (), the direct target population for immigrant policing would be immigrants without authorized U.S. presence.…”

“…Scholars are increasingly attentive to the importance of nativity as a cleavage that defines who is deserving of public investments and who is not (Condon, Filindra, and Wichowsky ; Fox ). From the perspective of the policy inclusion effects (PIE) framework developed by Condon, Filindra, and Wichowsky (), the direct target population for immigrant policing would be immigrants without authorized U.S. presence. The PIE framework also stipulates spillover effects to individuals who are connected to direct policy targets, including those with shared familial and social networks as well as co‐ethnics (i.e., the Latino community) who may experience racial profiling associated with immigrant policing.…”

Studying Public Policy through Immigration Policy: Advances in Theory and Measurement

“…Immigration policy scholars, especially those working on state‐level analyses in the United States, but also those studying public opinion, draw on theoretical frameworks from policy areas like welfare (Soss, Fording, & Schram, ; Soss, Schram, & Fording, ) and criminal justice (Peffley & Hurwitz, ). In recent years, immigration policy scholars have also sought to adopt theories from the broader public policy literature, especially perspectives on policy feedback (Condon, Filindra, & Wichowsky, ; Filindra & Manatschal, ), policy diffusion (Collingwood et al, ), as well as insights from punctuated equilibrium theory (Tichenor, ). The reality—and, perhaps, irony—of immigration policy studies is that as migrants continue to settle in new destinations and as host communities continue to generate more migrant‐related policies, migrants become just another category of individuals subject to public policy; thus, as migrants become another category of denizen, so too does the study of immigrant‐related policies become more similar to regular public policy.…”