Why the notice of HHS on federal public benefits harms legally present and undocumented immigrants

Last week, the United States Ministry of Health and Social Services (HHS) announced that it limits the access of undocumented immigrants to many federal advantages, causing an uproar from organizations for the defense of health and immigration organizations.

HHS canceled an interpretation in 1998 of the 1996 law on personal responsibility and the 1996 work opportunities (PRWORA), which has extended certain federal public advantages to undocumented immigrants. It has provided a revised list of programs now classified as federal public advantages, which includes certified community health clinics, HEAD Start, the family planning program for title X and more. The new restrictions came into force on July 14 with a 30 -day commentary period ending on August 13.

“For too long, the government has diverted the taxes of the Americans who work hard to encourage illegal immigration,” said HHS secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr, in a statement. “The action of today changes which – it restores the integrity of federal social programs, applies the rule of law and protects vital resources for the American people.”

Several organizations of defense of defenders of health and immigration have spoken out against the decision, arguing that these programs live their lives for the families of immigrants. And it is not only undocumented immigrants who will be injured by this decision.

As part of the Prwora, “qualified immigrants” are eligible for federal benefits of benefits. This includes legitimate permanent residents or people with a green card, refugees and granted asylum. However, many legally present immigrants are not listed as qualified immigrants and are therefore not eligible for these programs, such as people with temporary protection status who fled an emergency, survivors of domestic violence with special “U” visas and survivors of children’s abuses with “special status for immigrants for immigrants”, according to immigrant rights.

Those who have been approved for a legal permanent residence but who have not yet received a green card are not listed as qualified immigrants either.

The decision of HHS will also harm American citizens in the families of immigrants, has argued PIF. It is common, for example, for a parent to be undocumented and that children are American citizens. If someone in the family is not eligible for federal health programs, it is less likely for other family members who are eligible to access these services.

“This change could have a huge impact on 27% of the American population living in immigrant families,” said Esther Reyes, a pif campaign strategist in an email. “This includes not only undocumented persons, but also legally present immigrants and American citizens in the families of immigrants. Families of immigrants generally include people – often children – who are American citizens, people who have green cards or other legitimate statuses, and people who are not documented. Our whole experience with exclusive policies – in particular confused policy changes like this – is that they harm entire families. ”

These comments were taken over by Isha Weerasinghe, director of legal courts at the Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP), a non -profit organization focused on politics for low -income people. The change of HHS will also make it difficult for health establishments and social services to determine who is eligible for services, “potentially refusing to take care much more than those who are deemed” qualified “, which makes it more difficult for everyone to access services,” added Weerasinghe.

“If our health care system is less effective for American citizens, it is not because an immigrant went to a health clinic – it is rather because this administration has dismissed thousands of HHS members who help administer programs and have simply signed a bill of $ 4 billions of dollars with the greatest discounts of Medicaid in the history of the program. Weerasinghe said.

Reyes added that health centers are a “rescue buoy” for low -income families, including many families of immigrants, providing basic care such as mammography as well as more complex care such as cancer treatment.

A framework of Unidosus, a Hispanic organization of civil rights and defenders, agreed with this, arguing that providing families of immigrants to these programs has been beneficial for communities. She particularly called the program of women, infants and children, which provides food assistance to pregnant women, new mothers and young children.

“These are people who are part of the workforce. These are people who contribute, “said Carmen Feliciano, vice-president of politics and advocacy in Unidosus, in an interview. “These are children who were born here. Thus, all these years, almost 30 years of politics that work properly, to simply develop this very wide policy without any data to support this, it has been harmful or harmful to communities, which makes no sense. ”

What can be done

Many defenders’ defense organizations take advantage of the 30 -day commentary period, including Families USA, which supports consumers of health care.

“This opportunity is essential for a large coalition of stakeholders, including employers and small businesses, immigrants, their families, their neighbors and people who serve or work with immigrant communities to weigh and raise concerns with the interpretation of HHS, and defend continuous access to these vital programs,” said Staci Lofton, senior director of health. “If enough decline is generated, HHS can revise its position.”

Unidosus also submits comments on the damage that this policy may have on the United States, said Feliciano.

“No one will benefit from having underdeveloped children or people who are hungry and who cannot go to work,” she said. “It is not an advantage for anyone.”

Reyes de Pif also called on states and the congress to act.

“States understand that denying people access to care does not eliminate their care needs-that only moves the costs of emergency rooms and, by extension, state taxpayers and the employer’s sponsored insurance,” she said. “States should document the damage resulting from this HHS policy and push their delegations from the Congress for Action.

“And I fear that it was released a few days ago, and there was no public response from the Democrats on the Energy and Trade Committee of the Chamber or the Senate Aid Committee,” she continued. “This policy is a major threat to the health of the nation, and people who direct the nation must take action.”

Photo: Philip Rozenski, Getty Images