The Trump administration is shaping up to be one of the most hawkish administrations on immigration in recent memory. But it is not just illegal immigration that they have in their sights. The administration is floating yet another plan to crack down on legal immigration into the United States.
The move, being promoted by Trump adviser Stephen Miller, is seen as targeting low-income legal immigrants. It would make it harder for them to be naturalized if they use a variety of popular welfare programs. It is already grounds for green card refusal if an immigrant is a “public charge” or reliant on the government for means of subsistence.
Under the current law, if a would-be immigrant is mostly dependent on public cash assistance for income maintenance or is required to be institutionalized for long-term care, they can be rejected for a green card. Basically, under the current law being a recipient of TANF, a similar state program, or being in long-term care defines one as a “public charge.” Other programs such as food stamps, Medicaid, Section 8 benefits, child care assistance, and short-term aid such as utilizing food pantries and disaster aid do not qualify as “public charge.”
The Trump administration wants to redefine “public charge” to add more programs to the list. Reuters first reported it in February and NBC News confirmed it this morning.
This is in addition to anecdotal reports from immigration lawyers and activists that the Trump administration has rejected more green card and citizenship applications than recent administrations in memory. But it should be noted that in the NBC News report, they analyzed the data and found that green card and citizenship approvals in the current fiscal year were on track with the fiscal year 2016 (data was not available for FY 2017).
According to Reuters, here are the programs that will now be added to the “public charge” list:
Among the benefits singled out in the draft rule for consideration are: health insurance subsidies such as those provided by the Affordable Care Act; the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP); the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP); WIC, a federal program that feeds poor pregnant or nursing women and their children; transportation and housing vouchers; programs that help the poor pay their heating bills; and programs such as Head Start, which provides early education to low-income children.
Some benefits would not be considered in making the “public charge” determination under the draft regulations, including emergency or disaster relief, public health assistance for immunizations, attending public school, receiving free or reduced-price school lunches, and earned benefits such as disability insurance, Medicare and unemployment payments.
I have no problem with adding some of these programs to the “public charge” list. Honestly, I don’t want immigrants in this country who rely on welfare either through themselves or their children to live. Immigration has to work for the immigrant but it also has to work even more for those who are already citizens.
If I was in charge, I would restrict most of the programs in the first paragraph to only those who are citizens and green card holders. That is until I got rid of them for everyone.
I’m also fine with not counting the programs in the second paragraph as “public charge” either. Most of those programs are for limited scope and duration or benefit citizens as much as the immigrant. Either that or the immigrant pays for those programs through the payroll tax.
My objections to the proposal are the inclusion of Obamacare subsidies and Head Start to the list. As long as it is required under federal law to purchase health insurance, I can’t blame anyone for taking advantage of subsidies in order to comply with the law. It is unfair to penalize immigrants for using subsidies in order to comply with the law, which has not been changed (the individual mandate has merely been zeroed out).
As for Head Start, we want these kids in school. Yes, Head Start is an ineffective program that should be killed off. But having these kids in school enables the parents to be productive citizens and helps acclimate them to American culture and society.
This Trump administration proposal would fall on low and middle-income immigrants. Some such as libertarian writer Bruce Majors argue that a welfare state and a liberal immigration policy cannot coexist. (a longer form of his piece is here).
Majors wrote:
A better policy would do what libertarians are supposed to believe in: protecting Americans from being subjected to force and fraud, to robbery and expropriation. Anyone in the United States who is a net tax consumer activates the apparatus that has a gun aimed at and a jail cell (lien, fines, interest, and penalties) waiting for every American who is a net taxpayer.
It is tough if not impossible to determine who is a “net tax consumer” based on income alone. In his piece, Majors also doesn’t bring up that border enforcement has costs of its own, for example, the wall that Trump wants to build is likely to cost more than expected. After a certain amount of money, it costs more to secure the border than it is worth.
The solution is an expanded guest worker program for low-skilled workers. There are many parts of the country that have a labor shortage that needs to be filled. There are many people who would like to work in the United States. Let’s bring these willing workers and employers together.
Under this guest worker program, these workers can work legally in the U.S. for three years, with a chance to renew at least once. They are ineligible for all means-tested welfare programs except public schooling, Obamacare subsidies, and emergency healthcare. They can’t bring their dependents but they can go home for a certain amount of time to visit them. Finally, those who are here illegally but have committed no other crime can participate.
The Trump administration’s desire to have immigrants be less burdensome to taxpayers is well-intentioned, but it’s a flawed plan. It seems more of an attempt to limit immigration in general than just building a wall around the welfare state. Without a guest worker plan that would give us the immigrant labor we need, all this will do is harm the country in the long-run.