INSANE: Center for Immigration Studies Director Just Testified UNDER OATH That Over 60% of Illegal Alien Households Are STILL on Welfare. CUT IT ALL OFF! EVERY DIME!

INSANE: Center for Immigration Studies Director Just Testified UNDER OATH That Over 60% of Illegal Alien Households Are STILL on Welfare. CUT IT ALL OFF! EVERY DIME!

 This testimony exposes a harsh reality: over 60% of households headed by illegal immigrants are still drawing on welfare programs, siphoning billions from hardworking American taxpayers every year.

Our veterans—men and women who risked everything for this country—face denied treatments and long waits for care they rightfully earned, while endless funds flow to those who entered illegally. This isn't compassion; it's a betrayal of citizens who built and defended the nation.

Enough is enough. Cut off every dime of taxpayer-funded benefits to illegal aliens immediately, secure the border, and put American citizens first—where they belong

The image shows Jessica Vaughan, the Center for Immigration Studies’ director of policy studies, at a witness table with a microphone and nameplate, eyes down as if reading testimony. Above her, the headline turns her appearance into a verdict: 60 percent, “STILL on welfare,” and the demand to zero it out. It’s vivid, but the numbers need unpacking.

Vaughan did testify recently, and CIS has published work finding that over 60 percent of households headed by noncitizens without legal status use at least one major means-tested program. The headline treats that as settled fact, but there are conditional lines that matter. CIS counts benefits going to households — not necessarily to the unauthorized person. Many of those homes are mixed-status: children who are U.S.-born citizens receive Medicaid or school meals; the underlying surveys (Census Bureau data) rely on self-reported status and household-level benefit questions, which researchers group different ways. Federal law already bars undocumented immigrants from SNAP, TANF, Medicaid outside emergency cases, and SSI; citizen children in those homes can receive benefits, and that’s what shows up.

Do 60 percent of unauthorized immigrants themselves draw cash welfare? No — eligibility rules forbid it, and studies that separate direct recipients find much lower rates. Does 60 percent of households with an unauthorized member intersect with programs like Medicaid or free lunch because of U.S.-born kids? In CIS’s allocation, yes, and that’s their argument for a policy change. Critics say the framing conflates household use with individual eligibility.

Vaughan’s presence is real; the hearing is real; the “UNDER OATH” garnish is true of congressional testimony. The headline’s call to “CUT IT ALL OFF!” moves from a contested social-science estimate to a command. That move is the point of the image. The underlying data exist, but they come with margins, definitions, and a citizen-children factor the headline drops. “INSANE” is how the poster feels. In the witness chair, Vaughan’s job is quieter: give a number, cite the CPS, and let lawmakers decide what to do about households the law treats differently than persons.