Trump Just Denied Green Cards And Freebies To Those Who Don't Deserve It – All Hell
About To Unleash
The Department of Homeland Security recently released a draft of the regulation to stop
legal immigration of those are likely to need taxpayer assisted aid program.
These include medical care, anti-poverty aid as well as pension aid.
This regulation is based on a long-standing law that is already in place and could start
as early as potentially next year.
The regulation is meant to sharply decrease the cost to taxpayers of supporting the nearly
1.1 million migrants that come to American legally and are given green cards annually.
Over the next few years, it can decrease the influx of unskilled labor.
This is meant to potentially help nudge the employee wages for unskilled Americans.
The regulation utilizes existing law that has already been in place for some time.
Thus, various migration advocates will find difficulty when they attempt their lawsuits.
It is expected that business groups will lobby Congressional members to override and get
rid of the regulation.
Breitbart reported,
"The regulation uses existing law, so migration advocates may not be able to stop it via lawsuits
unless President Donald Trump loses the 2020 election.
However, business groups likely will lobby Congress to override the regulation.
The rule likely will trim the fast-growing inflow of elderly migrants, such as the retired
parents of recent immigrants.
It could also block the arrival of many ailing or poor chain-migrants, such as the siblings
of unskilled immigrants, but it is not likely to reduce the overall chain-migration inflow
because the chain-migration waiting-line of 4 million people includes many people who
are not poor, ill or unskilled.
The proposed regulation does not cover immigrants who already have green cards or citizenship.
But the regulation will cover many illegals, overstays, and visa-workers who are in the
United States and hope to file an "Adjustment of Status" that would get them green cards
and also allow them to import their relatives via the chain-migration rules that Congress
has refused to reform.
The agency's statement says:
the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced a proposed rule that will clearly
define long-standing law to ensure that those seeking to enter and remain in the United
States either temporarily or permanently can support themselves financially and will not
be reliant on public benefits … [or] likely to become burdens on American taxpayers.
DHS is proposing to consider current and past receipt of designated public benefits above
certain thresholds as a heavily weighed negative factor.
The rule would also make nonimmigrants who receive or are likely to receive designated
public benefits above the designated threshold generally ineligible for change of status
and extension of stay.
The public benefits proposed to be designated in this rule are federal, state, local, or
tribal cash assistance for income maintenance, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF),
Supplemental Security Income (SSI), Medicaid (with limited exceptions for Medicaid benefits
paid for an "emergency medical condition," and for certain disability services related
to education), Medicare Part D Low Income Subsidy, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance
Program (SNAP, or food stamps), institutionalization for long-term care at government expense,
Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program, Section 8 Project-Based Rental Assistance,
and Public Housing.
The first three benefits listed above are cash benefits that are covered under current
policy.
The phrase "heavily weighed negative factor" implies that most — but not all — poor,
sick and unskilled applicants will not be given residency.
The regulation does not count taxpayer aid related to the Affordable Care Act or the
Children's Health Insurance Program, and it excludes taxpayers' rebates under the
Earned Income Tax Credit.
The rule also allows would-be immigrants to receive a small amount of aid, or roughly
$3,765 for a family of four, or a $1,821 for a single person.
The rules only apply once the regulation is established, so it does not cover potential
migrants' current use of aid programs.
The DHS statement and DHS Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen noted that the regulation implements
a long-ignored law excluding migrants who may impose a "public charge" on Americans:
The term "public charge" as applied to admission of aliens to the United States has
a long history in U.S. immigration law, appearing at least as far back as the Immigration Act
of 1882.
In the late 19th and early 20th centuries public charge was the most common ground for
refusing admission at U.S. ports of entry.
"Under long-standing federal law, those seeking to immigrate to the United States
must show they can support themselves financially," said Secretary Nielsen.
"The Department takes seriously its responsibility to be transparent in its rulemaking and is
welcoming public comment on the proposed rule.
This proposed rule will implement a law passed by Congress intended to promote immigrant
self-sufficiency and protect finite resources by ensuring that they are not likely to become
burdens on American taxpayers."
The new policy was slammed by advocates for mass migration and imposed diversity, and
it was praised by pro-American groups who support lower immigration rates.
The National Immigration Law Center portrayed the regulation as an insult to poor people:
"The proposal is reckless, deeply unfair, and inconsistent with core American values.
It is a massive backdoor change to decades of immigration law.
It places wealth over family, denying ordinary working families a place in America.
And it explicitly places a priority on well-off families and ignores families who have waited
years to be reunited" said Olivia Golden, executive director of the Center for Law and
Social Policy.
Pro-migration progressives also portrayed the reform as an attack on children, including
the U.S-born children of recent migrants.
In April, Washington state Gov. Jay Inslee complained about the pending regulation, writing:
The proposal is clearly intended to deny basic supports like food, health care, and housing
to lawfully present immigrants and their families — including millions of children and U.S.
citizens — who pay taxes, work, go to school and contribute to our country's economy.
But immigration reformers applauded the regulations needed to implement the existing law.
"This is long overdue," said Mark Krikorian, the executive director of the Center for Immigration
Studies, told the New York Times.
For years, "this country has defined public charge in a fictional way in order to facilitate
high levels of low-skilled immigration.
But this is simply a 21st-century definition of what public charge is."
He continued:
This isn't a moral issue …. A Honduran with a sixth-grade education level isn't
morally flawed, but he works three jobs and still can't feed his family.
Immigrants with low levels of skill are a mismatch for a modern society like ours."
No comments:
Post a Comment