Patterico's Pontifications


Obama Courts Illegal Immigrant Welfare Dependents in Violation of Law

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 11:30 pm

Obama is making citizens out of illegal immigrants who have been on welfare, and ignoring the fact that they have been on welfare, in defiance of federal law:

It is an explicit and unambiguous tenet in federal law that those granted entry into the U.S. must be able to support themselves financially. But the Obama Administration has aggressively defied this strict federal statute.­ What are new promises worth when existing law is unilaterally waived?

Last year, the Ranking Members of Budget, Finance, Judiciary, and Agriculture Committees wrote an oversight letter to Secretaries Napolitano and Clinton that said in part:

The [Immigration and Nationality Act] specifically states: “An alien who…is likely at any time to become a public charge is inadmissible.” … We were thus shocked to discover that both the State Department and DHS exclude reliance on almost all governmental welfare programs when evaluating whether an alien is likely to become a public charge….Under your interpretation, an able-bodied immigrant of working age could receive the bulk of his or her income in the form of federal welfare and still not be deemed a “public charge.”

DHS even has a website,, that features a page promoting welfare benefits to newly arrived immigrants. (Some of these benefits, under law, should automatically disqualify the applicants from entry into the U.S. The page is also being updated to promote free coverage under the President’s health law.)

Via Power Line, via DRJ in comments.

Any new welfare dependent is a new Democratic vote. If Obama can snap his fingers and make millions more such voters, Democrats won’t even have to campaign in the future.

23 Responses to “Obama Courts Illegal Immigrant Welfare Dependents in Violation of Law”

  1. Thought I had published this earlier today. Go figure.

    Patterico (e19df2)

  2. obama loves criminal aliens, must be in his dna.

    mg (31009b)

  3. And this is a surprise because . . . ?

    Jcw46 (eda37d)

  4. Congress is shocked, shocked! to learn that Obama is blatantly violating clear federal law. They won’t do a damn thing about it other than write a meaningless letter, but they’re shocked!

    This type of spineless idiocy is why this country is in so much trouble.

    Observer (b1c63e)

  5. Oh, SNAP!

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  6. So the Gang of Eight Amnesty Bill accords the DHS Hermaphrodite the call on its Border Security guarantees?

    What could go wrong?

    gary gulrud (dd7d4e)

  7. Mish digs into Hilda’s swan song:

    157K is really 17K? Sounds about right.

    gary gulrud (dd7d4e)

  8. Probably, gary, they seem to be following Sra. Kirschner’s example;

    narciso (3fec35)

  9. Wonder what the naive Mr. Rubio thinks of all this.

    BTW is anyone getting those ads that look like links in the article? You click on them and they’re popups.

    Patricia (be0117)

  10. The most lawless administration in six decades.

    SPQR (a2a4ac)

  11. The most transparently lawless administration in six decades.

    You left a word out. Fixed it fer ya.
    Glad to help.

    Smock Puppet, 10th Dan Snark Master and Labeler of the Obama-Naut (98ae1f)

  12. Test

    Smock Puppet, 10th Dan Snark Master and Labeler of the Obamaᵒ (98ae1f)

  13. As Mark and others have pointed out, perhaps the bigger issue is the fact that the American press and voting public support such behavior, so that even if the one wasn’t in office, they would prefer someone like him.

    MD in Philly (3d3f72)

  14. Quick! Before it’s too late, Marco Rubio sez the Repubs need to put their stamp on this.



    I’ve lost my train of non-thought. Somebody help me out. Why do the Repubs need to put their stamp on this?

    Steve57 (544a72)

  15. 1. Did this just start with Obama, or has it been going on longer?

    2. They surely consulted lawyers. What is the legal justification? There must be some. Has somebody redefined public charge? Has Jeff Sessions? If you don’t know what the reasoning is, you’re going off half-cocked.

    Note: The basic not likely to become a public charge provision, has been law since 1885. There never has been any enforcibility to this provision, except for possible denial of admission.

    When combined with the no hiring in advance (“no contract labor) provision, this often results in the necessity of “sponsorship” and the latter I think has also been law since 1885. Sponsers have to have a certain level of income above the poverty line.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  16. Is Jeff Sessions merely complaining about the fact the government website tells them such aand such programs exist, noting that there is a delay.

    I would think likely is a 50% chance or even you can say a 20% chance. Not a 0% chance. Also this may apply only to basic suppport, not minor additions to income.

    And there is no contradiction between making an assessment that a person is not likely to become a public charge, and noting, among other facts, that these programs exist and that an immigrant may eventually become eligible for them. It may be questioned why is this being pointed out.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  17. BNy the way this has nothing to do with illegal immigranmts, unless the point is amnesty petitions will have to meet this requirement too.

    The letetr notes:

    We were thus shocked to discover that both the State Department and DHS exclude reliance on almost all governmental welfare programs when evaluating whether an alien is likely to become a public charge….Under your interpretation, an able-bodied immigrant of working age could receive the bulk of his or her income in the form of federal welfare and still not be deemed a “public charge.”

    Big question: When did this start?

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  18. On open thread: Comment by SPQR (768505) — 2/4/2013 @ 9:13 am

    the most recent example being that the admin was granting immigration petitions in contravention of the law regarding public assistance.

    This probably goes back to the Reagan Administration, if not earlier.

    Not to interpret that provision very leniently would probably result in very few petitions for parents, or elderly refugees, from being granted –
    and that was not Congress’ intent.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  19. Sammy – Follow the link provided.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  20. The applicable regulation may be found in 9 FAM 40.41 N2.2 Benefits Not Considered “Public Cash Assistance for Income Maintenance”, which includes the following:

    “Neither the past nor possible future receipt of such non-cash or supplemental assistance may be considered in determining whether an alien is likely to become a public charge. As discussed at INA 213A, Note 1, these benefits that are not to be considered as public cash assistance or income include, but are not limited to:

    (1) The Food Stamp Program;

    (2) The Medicaid Program (other than payments under Medicaid for long-term institutional care);

    (3) The Child Health Insurance Program (CHIP);

    (4) Emergency medical services;

    (5) The Women, Infants and Children (WIC) Program;

    (6) Other nutrition and food assistance programs;

    (7) Other health and medical benefits;

    (8) Child-care benefits;

    (9) Foster care;

    (10) Transportation vouchers;

    (11) Job training programs;

    (12) Energy assistance, such as the low-income home energy assistance program (LIHEAP);

    (13) Educational assistance, such as Head Start or aid for elementary, secondary, or higher education;

    (14) Job training;

    (15) In-kind emergency community services, such as soup kitchens and crisis counseling;

    (16) State and local programs that serve the same purposes as the Federal in-kind programs listed above; and

    (17) Any other Federal, State, or local program in which benefits are paid in-kind, by voucher or by any means other than payment of cash benefits to the eligible person for income maintenance.”

    Consul-At-Arms (d3a02c)

  21. The above is apparently the specific result of the “Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996.”

    Consul-At-Arms (d3a02c)

  22. None of the politicians or the preponderance of them show no sympathy for the 23 Americans either completely jobless, destitute, or the part time employees or those who have given up hope of finding work? All they seem interested in is highly skilled workers or the agricultural Guest worker. As I have always said, much of this illegal immigration to the United States would never have happened, if illegal entry was enacted as a Felony? That the genuine 2006 secure double layer fence law had been in place and adequately funded? That the 1986 Immigration Control and Reform Act (ICRA) had strictly been enforced, instead of the questionable move by big corporations and all businesses to gain the upper hand by buying of lawmakers, so interior enforcement was next to nothing. So over these 3 decades the unconcerned legislators have turned a blind eye to the millions who crossed the poorly, undermanned borders, or never tracked the 46 percent airline passenger overstays who joined the illegal immigration invaders. The original 1986, 3 million who gained citizenship has broadened; bringing in family members through family unification migration, which has led to President Obama’s Dream Act for years of conceiving children on the taxpayer’s dime. If you are disposed to believe the 11 million illegal alien populations that is already settled here, or as most people have illustrated well over 20 million that seems more plausible as far as I’m concerned? To me that just prove to me that there has been no inclination to stop those who could reach our border, because miles of open areas still remain?

    Certain skilled workers who benefit America, is an advantage in this global market. And even a well regulated system to contract AGworkers, who are here strictly on a temporary basis? But non skilled labor, which has an overall advantage on millions of low income Americans, should not be tolerated without exception. If employers paid fair wages, most citizens and legal green card holders would be able to find a job, except the deadbeats that that have used the welfare system to support them. However President Obama and his czars have decided that the future of the Liberal Progressives, depend on generations of illegal migrants and immigrants as new citizens to vote them into Congress for years to come? This plan doesn’t just effect Republicans, but every citizen and all other legal nationalities, skin color and every class of worker. Not too many Americans see any advantage to a path to citizenship, because substantial amounts of money will be needed for retirement and pensions, no to exclude the processing cost. Both parties have already signed onto illegal aliens receiving Social Security, but where is the money coming from? Same with this child rebate tax controversy, which the IRS has ignored even though the estimate going to illegal aliens is now 7 Billion dollars.

    Two main laws that can at least scratch the service of illegal alien payments is mandatory THE LEGAL WORKFORCE and E-Verify Bill, that can reverse illegal aliens getting jobs by using the federal computer detection program, that could become mandatory for all workers and prosecution for tough business owners The essential law would be a simple amendment to end the contentious BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP BILL, so only children of a U.S. citizen could claim citizenship. So no more smuggled unborn or infants as associated with the Anchor Baby, would be able to gain citizen advantage to collect hundreds of billions of dollars in entitlement programs. However, without the blast of angry voice of the people, these policies sit in dormant, dusty filing cabinets in Washington. Research this information by checking out Judicial Watch, TEA PARTY.ORG and NumbersUSA and learn how the Liberal Democrats are splitting the country to forward their agenda.

    Incidentally, I heard today that the term Illegal Immigrant is politically incorrect by Democrat Rep. John Conyers Well—Sorry an illegal alien is the correct terminology, because only people who are inspected, have a visa or permission to enter a port of entry are legal immigrants? Just like the honest immigrant that awaits in faraway places to gain admittance is a legal immigrant.

    In concluding, Los Angeles County (just one county) spends over $1.Billion dollars annually in financing illegal alien welfare, states city administrator Michael D. Andronovich.

    Dave Francis (42184b)

Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.0800 secs.