78 percent of Somali immigrant households remain on welfare even after a decade in the United States—a statistic that ignited a fierce debate on Capitol Hill and reopened the debate over immigration, welfare dependency, and political accountability.
The statistic, cited by Rep. Brandon Gill, during a heated Oversight Committee hearing, has become a flashpoint in a broader reckoning over Minnesota’s sprawling welfare system and recent revelations of large-scale fraud.
The exchange unfolded as Rep. Gill pressed state officials and witnesses on disparities in welfare usage. He contrasted the figures he cited for Somali-headed households with far lower rates among native-born Minnesota households, arguing that the gap raised serious questions about policy outcomes.
This Democrat witness claims large-scale Somali immigration makes Minnesota stronger.
The numbers tell a different story. pic.twitter.com/ufxlVgwqLa
— Congressman Brandon Gill (@RepBrandonGill) January 7, 2026
When challenged, Democratic witnesses attempted to blur the distinction, insisting that many Somali Minnesotans are American-born and culturally integrated. Gill rejected that framing, returning repeatedly to the numbers and arguing that outcomes—not intentions—are what ought to matter in public policy.
The congressman went further, stating that more than 80 percent of Somali-headed households receive some form of welfare assistance. Even after ten years of residency, he said, nearly four in five remain dependent on government support—a figure he argued is incompatible with claims of successful integration.
These remarks landed amid a cascade of corruption investigations in Minnesota that have shaken public confidence. State and federal authorities have uncovered what they describe as one of the largest fraud scandals in recent US history, involving alleged abuse of childcare subsidies, food assistance programs, and healthcare funding.
Investigators estimate that as much as $9 billion may have been siphoned off through fake nonprofits and shell organizations. According to prosecutors, many of these operations inflated enrollment numbers or fabricated services while collecting taxpayer dollars.
Republicans have emphasized that fraud is not confined to any single group. Still, the demographic profile of many defendants has drawn attention, particularly after Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer noted that a significant number of those charged are of Somali descent.
Gill seized on this point to argue that Minnesota’s political leadership ignored warning signs for years. He suggested that aggressive oversight was avoided because of electoral considerations, not a lack of evidence.
That line of questioning led to testimony from Minnesota state Rep. Walter Hudson, who acknowledged that the Somali community represents a key voting bloc for Democrats. Pressed further, Hudson agreed that investigating fraud risked political backlash.
To critics, the exchange confirmed long-standing suspicions that welfare programs have been shielded from scrutiny for ideological reasons. They argue that fear of appearing insensitive has allowed corruption to flourish at the expense of taxpayers and genuinely needy families.
Democrats on the committee pushed back sharply. Rep. Robert Garcia warned against painting entire communities with a broad brush and insisted that fraud enforcement must be precise, targeted, and fair.
Garcia stressed that wrongdoing should be punished, but only on an individual basis. He argued that welfare programs remain essential lifelines and that dismantling them based on headline-grabbing statistics would harm innocent recipients.
Still, pressure is mounting for decisive action. House Majority Whip Tom Emmer has publicly urged the Trump administration to deport non-citizens convicted in connection with the Minnesota fraud schemes, framing it as a matter of basic law enforcement.
The debate has also intersected with new legislative proposals. Rep. Wesley Hunt of Texas recently introduced a bill requiring refugees from several high-risk regions—including Somalia—to self-deport after 180 days unless they meet stricter standards.
Supporters of the measure argue it would restore credibility to the refugee system and discourage long-term dependency. Opponents call it overly punitive and warn of humanitarian consequences.
The post 78% of Somali Immigrant Households Still on Welfare After a Decade, Congressman Gill Says, Citing State Welfare Stats appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.