Among the programs identified are health care, housing assistance, education grants, tax credits, discounted automobile insurance and even smartphones.
The authors wrote that foreigners can receive “health care, rental assistance, college grants, tax credits, low-cost car insurance, and even smartphones on the taxpayers’ dime,” highlighting the breadth of programs available through California’s expansive social-services network.
The report’s findings were based in part on visits to four California welfare offices. According to the authors, employees at those locations acknowledged that illegal immigrants can qualify for certain benefits or receive assistance through programs involving their U.S.-born children.
One exchange cited in the report involved CalWORKS, California’s cash-assistance program for families.
“If you were born here and the child was born here, you get money for two,” a welfare officer in Los Angeles said of CalWORKS, which provides short-term cash assistance to families.
“Because she is not and the child is, she only gets money for the child, and not for her.”
The distinction illustrates one of the central issues raised by the report: Even when an adult does not personally qualify for a particular benefit because of immigration status, U.S.-born children in the household may qualify for assistance.
That structure can still result in taxpayer-funded support flowing into households that include illegal immigrants.
The financial figures cited by the City Journal investigation are substantial.
The report estimated that California provided approximately $11 billion in subsidies benefiting illegal immigrants during the previous fiscal year alone.
The authors also presented an example of a household consisting of two illegal-immigrant parents, two children born in the United States and an illegally present grandparent. According to the report, such a household could potentially receive as much as $100,000 annually through various welfare programs.
That figure has significant implications in a state already struggling with soaring government expenditures, housing costs and a persistent budgetary debate over how taxpayer resources should be allocated.
The report also focuses on how California has navigated federal restrictions governing welfare benefits for illegal immigrants.
“federal law generally prohibits states from using federal dollars to serve illegal aliens,” the City Journal noted.
But according to the report, California found another route.
“To dodge those restrictions, California created parallel state- and locally funded programs that allowed the state to extend benefits to illegal immigrants.”
One example involves Medi-Cal, California’s massive health care program.
The authors said federal Medicaid dollars cannot simply be used to provide the full range of Medicaid-funded coverage to illegal immigrants. California, however, established a separate state-funded mechanism inside its Medi-Cal structure.
The report described it as a “state-funding ‘bucket’ within its Medi-Cal program to extend ‘full-scope’ coverage to illegal aliens.”
The scale of that expansion is another major point of contention.
“The expansions enrolled some 1.7 million people, costing the state an estimated $10 billion annually — more than twice what the state legislative analyst originally projected,” the report added.
Those numbers have put additional attention on Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat who has repeatedly backed policies expanding access to government services.
Newsom has also become a prominent national Democratic figure and is widely viewed as a potential contender for the White House in 2028.
The political debate surrounding California’s approach is therefore unlikely to remain confined to Sacramento.
Supporters of expanded benefits argue that providing health care and other services can reduce emergency costs and ensure children receive assistance regardless of their parents’ immigration status. Critics counter that generous public benefits can create another incentive for illegal immigration while shifting additional financial burdens onto American taxpayers.
The City Journal report points to California’s demographic transformation as part of the larger picture.
According to the report, roughly one in four California residents is foreign-born. The authors suggest that the state’s generous benefit structure may be one factor contributing to the continued attraction of migrants to California.
That argument is certain to generate controversy, particularly as immigration remains one of the most divisive political issues in the country.
California has long positioned itself as a counterweight to the federal government on immigration policy. State and local officials have frequently resisted cooperation with federal immigration enforcement, while Sacramento has continued pursuing policies designed to expand services available to immigrant communities.
Critics argue that these policies amount to a taxpayer-funded incentive structure.
They contend that when illegal immigrants can access health care, housing assistance, tax benefits and other public resources, the financial consequences extend well beyond immigration policy itself.
The report ultimately warns that California’s approach could become increasingly expensive if lawmakers continue expanding eligibility.
“This model — permissive rules and large loopholes — costs the state billions per year,” the report added.
“As benefits and eligibility continue to expand, that figure will only increase in the years ahead.”
The debate now centers on a fundamental question: How much should taxpayers be expected to spend supporting a welfare system that can provide substantial assistance to households containing people who entered or remain in the country illegally?
For California lawmakers, the answer could have major consequences for the state’s budget, its immigration policies and potentially the national Democratic Party’s approach to immigration heading into the 2028 election cycle.
