Trump Administration brings back concept of
immigrants supporting themselves without welfare!, by Ann Corcoran, 9/12/18
Pay attention to this!
I don’t know if it will apply to refugees who are eligible for virtually all welfare
programs shortly after arrival, but it should.
After
all, Senator Ted Kennedy and his pals assured Congress in the 1979 debate
leading up to the passage of the Refugee Act of 1980
that we were not going to be importing poverty with the newly formed Refugee
Admissions Program.
As
longtime readers know, big businesses, which hire refugees at low wages, expect
the refugees to be accessing welfare to supplement their income. So a
requirement that they not be using welfare when they adjust their status (like
when they apply for citizenship and voting rights!) would be a pretty chilling
move on the part of the Administration.
The
point to remember here is that this is already a law on the books. The
President is not writing law, just attempting to enforce it!
Here
is Matthew Vadum writing at the Epoch Times:
Trump Administration May Require Immigrants to Be Able to
Support Themselves Financially
A long-anticipated plan to enforce provisions in the nation’s
immigration laws that require prospective immigrants to be able to support
themselves financially—so-called public-charge provisions—might be introduced
by the Trump administration this month.
The
proposed regulations, defining the phrase “public charge” under Section
212(a)(4) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, may be published this fall,
and possibly as early as this month, according to a person close to the
rulemaking process of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) who requested
anonymity.
The total cost of providing welfare to
immigrants from 2009 to 2013 was $6.3 billion. This includes Medicaid $1.7
billion, Cash SSI $2.2 billion, Food Stamps SNAP $840 million and Public
Housing $1.6 billion. There were 752,363 refugees included as beneficiaries in
this Congressional report.
Please note that if the number of
refugees seems high to you that this chart, found at James Simpson’s Red Green
Axis, includes Asylees in addition to Refugees.
Left-wing advocacy organizations have attacked any attempt to formally
define “public charge” as being cruel and xenophobic, and aimed at drastically
curtailing the flow of immigrants to the United States. But the lengths to
which the new regulation will go remain to be seen.
Francis
Cissna, director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), an
agency within DHS, discussed a possible draft of the regulation during an Aug.
15 event at the National Press Club in Washington, hosted by the Center for
Immigration Studies.
“The
goal is not to reduce immigration or, in some diabolical fashion, shut the door
on people, family-based immigration, or anything like that,” Cissna said. “The goal is simply to enforce a ground of
inadmissibility to this country that’s been on the books for about 100–well,
more than 100 years.
Cissna said the public-charge section in the law, a provision that has
“hardly ever been enforced,” states that “an alien who in the opinion of the
consular officer at the time of application for a visa, or in the opinion of
the secretary of Homeland Security at the time of application for admission or
adjustment of status—getting a green card—is likely at any time to become a
public charge is inadmissible.”
The phrase “likely to become a public charge” has “never been, as far
as I know” interpreted in any regulation, he said. There was an attempt in the
1990s to define the expression, but it was dropped.
Cissna
said the administration wants to “issue proper regulations open to full public
comment, to, at long last, interpret what that means.”
More here. You might want to tell the White House
what you think! Click here.
Norb Leahy, Dunwoody
GA Tea Party Leader
No comments:
Post a Comment