Association for Public Policy Analysis & Management

Immigration policy has been at the center of public debate since the 2016 election, but the experiences of typical immigrant families remain largely hidden from public view. In this project, we leverage a unique source of survey and interview data collected in late 2018 into spring 2019 to learn more about the well-being of immigrant families in the context of the debate around the proposed public charge rule. The administration put forward a revised public charge rule for public comment in fall 2018 which proposed penalizing green card applicants for prior receipt of certain noncash public benefits, as well as for low income and other personal characteristics. Beyond potential reductions in immigration admissions, there is widespread concern that low-income immigrant families, who are already less likely to take up key safety net supports to meet their basic needs, will be further chilled from public services for which they are eligible for fear of future immigration consequences. We find that one in seven adults in immigrant families reported avoiding public benefit programs because of green card concerns in 2018, well before the publication of a final rule in August 2019. The share reporting this behavior is even higher (one in five) among adults in low-income immigrant families. This is affecting families with a wide range of immigration and citizenship statuses, including green card holders and US citizens. Our findings represent the first estimates of self-reported “chilling effects” from public programs associated with policy debate on the proposed rule in late 2018, and the complementary qualitative interviews unearth insights on family decision making and experiences of chilling on the ground.

We draw on data from the December 2018 Well-Being and Basic Needs Survey (WBNS), a nationally representative survey of adults ages 18 to 64 fielded annually by the Urban Institute through the Ipsos KnowledgePanel. The 2018 WBNS oversampled non-citizens to improve the precision of estimates for this population. Our analytic sample consists of English-proficient or primarily Spanish-speaking nonelderly adults in households with foreign-born members. We analyze the results of newly developed survey items measuring self-reported chilling effects from key public assistance programs and other behavioral changes related to the anti-immigrant policy climate. To complement quantitative results, we share findings from twenty-five phone interviews conducted with affected survey respondents. They highlight fear and confusion about the proposed public charge rule, a reliance on the media for information with few people seeking professional advice, and hardship for children and adults after losing access to public supports.

This mixed-method approach provides a nuanced view on experiences of immigrant households, informing stakeholders on the scope of actual program chilling and identifying key needs to better support immigrant families.