Final public charge rule

[Boketto 211]

19 minutes ago, AnonIndia said:

Also people with wives having Asian accents should be denied too. Bad engrish accent is a hindrance to getting employment. Might become a public charge!

I hope you’re just being facetious. 

[Esya 18]

Please someone help me! I have a conditional green card and I need to file in December to remove conditions. Will this new rule affect me in any way? I'm unemployed, my husband makes around 20k a year and I'm gonna start college soon. I also applied for FAFSA (financial aid). 

[AnonIndia 58]

Just now, Boketto said:

I hope you’re just being facetious. 

I am being facetious. I am just baffled by all the baby boomers with wives from poor Asian countries supporting this new public charge rule. If the intending immigrant's age, ability to work, education and English fluency were taken into account when these baby boomers were filing for their Asian wives of Nana Plaza, Bangkok fame they would have all been denied unless they the sponsors were making 250% above poverty line. Many are suggesting doing away with the Co-Sponsor or Joint Sponsor thing. Many sponsors living abroad with their spouses need co-sponsors and joint sponsors in order to qualify.  Incredible stupidity. 

1 minute ago, Esya said:

Please someone help me! I have a conditional green card and I need to file in December to remove conditions. Will this new rule affect me in any way? I'm unemployed, my husband makes around 20k a year and I'm gonna start college soon. I also applied for FAFSA (financial aid). 

Hopefully not. It does not classify as applying for a new green card. I don't know for sure. 

[geowrian 22,337]

1 minute ago, Esya said:

Please someone help me! I have a conditional green card and I need to file in December to remove conditions. Will this new rule affect me in any way? I'm unemployed, my husband makes around 20k a year and I'm gonna start college soon. I also applied for FAFSA (financial aid). 

tldr: No

[Lucky2Lucky 2,526]

1 hour ago, Nitas_man said:

No?  Awesome.  Then I guess the uproar is all for nothing then.

I sense sarcasm.

 

Are undocumented immigrants eligible for federal public benefit programs?

Generally no. Undocumented immigrants, including DACA holders, are ineligible to receive most federal public benefits, including means-tested benefits such as Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, sometimes referred to as food stamps), regular Medicaid, Supplemental Security Income (SSI), and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF). Undocumented immigrants are ineligible for health care subsidies under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and are prohibited from purchasing unsubsidized health coverage on ACA exchanges.

Undocumented immigrants may be eligible for a handful of benefits that are deemed necessary to protect life or guarantee safety in dire situations, such as emergency Medicaid, access to treatment in hospital emergency rooms, or access to healthcare and nutrition programs under the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC).

https://immigrationforum.org/article/fact-sheet-immigrants-and-public-benefits/

 

[jasonlzak 173]

So they assume that the immigrant will likely to become a public charge even though they are not eligible to receive such programs which are flagged as public charge. Make sense to me.

[geowrian 22,337]

They don't let people starve to death on the streets. People will get public aid if needed, although the I-864 was intended to prevent that from occurring, or to have the sponsor reimburse the government for funds used to do so.

[Scandi 4,163]

11 minutes ago, jasonlzak said:

So they assume that the immigrant will likely to become a public charge even though they are not eligible to receive such programs which are flagged as public charge. Make sense to me.

There's nothing preventing the immigrant from seeking and receiving such benefits. The govt can however seek up the sponsor and force him/her to pay it back.

[AnonIndia 58]

Just now, Scandi said:

There's nothing preventing the immigrant from seeking and receiving such benefits. The govt can however seek up the sponsor and force him/her to pay it back.

They could pass laws that make sure I-130 or K-1 immigrants are never eligible for benefits since they are already sponsored by US citizens to get tot the US. But they would rather never have them in the US in the first place if they are not fluent in English, poorly educated or the US citizen is not well off enough.  It is the spirit of the new law.

[Nitas_man 3,100]

1 hour ago, Luckycuds said:

I sense sarcasm.

 

You’d be right

 

https://cis.org/Report/63-NonCitizen-Households-Access-Welfare-Programs

 

These are the numbers.  They’re pretty alarming.  It is past time to reverse them.  

 

If this change truly did not have any impact, there would be no uproar.  Every single one of us did or are sponsoring an immigrant.  You would never pass red face test and accuse any of us of being anti immigration but enough is enough.  We have no business bringing an immigrant to this country that we cannot support.  

Edited August 14, 2019 by Nitas_man

[Allaboutwaiting 2,503]

Some useful information on the matter:

 

PUBLIC CHARGE 

DHS is proposing to define a public charge as an alien who receives one or more public benefits, as defined in 8 CFR 212.21(b).

 

PUBLIC BENEFITS

DHS proposes to define public benefit [264] to include a specific list of cash aid and noncash medical care, housing, and food benefit programs where either (1) the cumulative value of one or more such benefits that can be monetized (i.e., where DHS can determine the cash value of such benefit) exceeds 15 percent of the Federal Poverty Guidelines (FPG) for a household of one within a period of 12 consecutive months based on the per-month FPG for the months during which the benefits are received (hereafter referred to as the 15 percent of FPG or the proposed 15 percent standard or threshold); or (2) for benefits that cannot be monetized, the benefits are received for more than 12 months in the aggregate within a 36-month period.

 

Food, shelter, and necessary medical treatment are basic necessities of life. A person who needs the public's assistance to provide for these basic necessities is not self-sufficient.

 

Cash aid and non-cash benefits directed toward food, housing, and healthcare account for significant federal expenditure on low-income individuals and bear directly on self-sufficiency. Table 10 illustrates the estimated average annual public benefits payments and average annual benefit for each assistance program under consideration in this rule.

 

Edited August 14, 2019 by Allaboutwaiting

[AnonIndia 58]

2 minutes ago, Nitas_man said:

You’d be right

 

https://cis.org/Report/63-NonCitizen-Households-Access-Welfare-Programs

 

These are the numbers.  They’re pretty alarming.  It is past time to reverse them.  

 

If this change truly did not have any impact, there would be no uproar.  Every single one of us did or are sponsoring an immigrant.  You would never red face accuse any of us of being anti immigration but enough is enough.  We have no business bringing an immigrant to this country that we cannot support.  

They could easily pass laws making it so that non citizens are not eligible for any kind of welfare. Especially ones who come in on 1-130 and K-1 who already are supposed to be supported by their sponsors. The spirit of the new law is that they don't want them in the US in the first place cuz they are able to pop out US citizens changing the demographics of America. 

[Mrsjackson 300]

15 minutes ago, Nitas_man said:

You’d be right

 

https://cis.org/Report/63-NonCitizen-Households-Access-Welfare-Programs

 

These are the numbers.  They’re pretty alarming.  It is past time to reverse them.  

 

If this change truly did not have any impact, there would be no uproar.  Every single one of us did or are sponsoring an immigrant.  You would never pass red face test and accuse any of us of being anti immigration but enough is enough.  We have no business bringing an immigrant to this country that we cannot support.  

I’m always conflicted about things like this. I often hear people say “those who can’t afford kids shouldn’t have them.” And I think, so what? Reproduction should only be afforded to the middle class and the rich? If you don’t earn enough you shouldn’t be able to experience the joy of having a child if that’s what you want? This is similar to me. If you don’t earn enough then you shouldn’t be able to fall in love with and marry and build a life with whoever you want? 

 

I obviously fully comprehend the other side to these two scenarios. Other people having to fund other people’s choices also doesn’t seem fair. It’s tough out there. 

Edited August 14, 2019 by Mrsjackson

[Nitas_man 3,100]

5 minutes ago, Mrsjackson said:

I’m always conflicted about things like this. I often hear people say “those who can’t afford kids shouldn’t have them”. And I think, so what? 

I’m sure you do.  

 

“So what” is a two-way street

[AnonIndia 58]

28 minutes ago, Mrsjackson said:

I’m always conflicted about things like this. I often hear people say “those who can’t afford kids shouldn’t have them.” And I think, so what? Reproduction should only be afforded to the middle class and the rich? If you don’t earn enough you shouldn’t be able to experience the joy of having a child if that’s what you want? This is similar to me. If you don’t earn enough then you shouldn’t be able to fall in love with and marry and build a life with whoever you want? 

 

I obviously fully comprehend the other side to these two scenarios. Other people having to fund other people’s choices also doesn’t seem fair. It’s tough out there. 

Obvious answer is to deny any welfare to family based immigrants since they are already sponsored by individual US citizens. New law basically makes you double think who you fall in love with because they might not be fluent in English and they might not be eligible to live in the US with you. New law makes it so that only the upper middle class can afford to fall in love with whoever they want in the world. Obviously rich men won't have any problem importing young new wives from eastern european and Asian countries. US citizens of European descent constantly bemoan their declining birth rates but refrain from having kids unless the conditions are just right. Then when new immigrants have kids just for the joy of having kids they (removed) moan about white genocide, the browning of America and how they are being replaced.  

Edited August 14, 2019 by Ontarkie
bypassing language filter