Outrage’ over fed EBT push for immigrants

[Socio]

http://www.bostonherald.com/news/po..._fed_ebt_push_for_aliens/srvc=home&position=2

lawmakers are fuming over an Obama administration policy promoting welfare and EBT benefits for immigrants, with a “welcome” package and promotional website that encourage new arrivals to take advantage of the nation’s generous government largesse.

The fight over welfare for recent immigrants is unfolding in Washington, where a group of GOP senators has sent a letter to U.S. Department of Agriculture Secretary Thomas Vilsack demanding answers as to why food stamps and other welfare benefits are being promoted to new immigrants. The agency’s Welcome toUSA.gov website includes a comprehensive handbook directing immigrants on how to obtain food stamps, Medicare, disability and other taxpayer-funded aid.

“The federal government now is giving packets to people when they come to the United States ... that promote welfare benefits,” said U.S. Sen. Jeff Sessions

And we wonder why entitlement costs are skyrocketing and we are sailing head first off the fiscal cliff.

This is nothing more than the Libs buying vote power on a worldwide scale!

 

[shortylickens]

If they're talking about legal immigrants I am perfectly fine with that.

 

[nehalem256]

If they're talking about legal immigrants I am perfectly fine with that.

Why are we letting new immigrants into our country that cannot feed themselves?

Does the US suffer from a lack of unskilled labor?

 

[piasabird]

Every immigrant can pay $5,000 fine for every year they were in my country illegally. We will call it the undocumented immigration tax act.

The Fed Govt already said if children are in the USA then the state has to send them to school (k-12).

 

[Incorruptible]

We have over $16 trillion in debt and obama wants to make that even higher with, that pos and all his supporters

 

[Genx87]

I find it distasteful they appear to be promoting welfare to immigrants.

 

[piasabird]

I find it distateful the federal government is promoting any kind of welfare.

 

[nehalem256]

from the article

The USDA signed a pact in 2004 with Mexico requiring 50 U.S.-based consulates to hand out information to Mexican nationals on how to obtain welfare and other benefits.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Legal immigrants should be allowed to have access.

I would like the rules to be enforced that the people that sponsor the immigrants are required to provide the support that they signed for.

There are documents that are signed stating a immigrant will not be needing support of the government for x years. financial documents need to be provided showing that the sponsor has the resources to support/provide.

Is this another case of the immigration law not being enforced?

 

[blackangst1]

I wonder why when I immigrated my wife we werent given this information? Instead, I had to meet sufficient income levels to assure she wouldnt become a burden on the state.

HMP.

 

[Ausm]

http://www.bostonherald.com/news/po..._fed_ebt_push_for_aliens/srvc=home&position=2





And we wonder why entitlement costs are skyrocketing and we are sailing head first off the fiscal cliff.

This is nothing more than the Libs buying vote power on a worldwide scale!

Why don't we cut the subsidization to defense contractors in half then the problem would be fixed for the next 500 years?

 

[Londo_Jowo]

I wonder why when I immigrated my wife we werent given this information? Instead, I had to meet sufficient income levels to assure she wouldnt become a burden on the state.

HMP.

Same here and wait 18 months for the process to be completed to boot.

 

[Incorruptible]

Why don't we cut the subsidization to defense contractors in half then the problem would be fixed for the next 500 years?

How about we cut both?

 

[spacejamz]

Legal immigrants should be allowed to have access.

I would like the rules to be enforced that the people that sponsor the immigrants are required to provide the support that they signed for.

There are documents that are signed stating a immigrant will not be needing support of the government for x years. financial documents need to be provided showing that the sponsor has the resources to support/provide.

Is this another case of the immigration law not being enforced?

Providing access and encouraging new immigrants to use welfare benefits as soon as they arrive are two COMPLETELY different things.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Why don't we cut the subsidization to defense contractors in half then the problem would be fixed for the next 500 years?

Define subsidy?

contract for military equipment?
contract for R&D?
contract for training
contract for support?

Each is a contract; not a subsidy.
It is something that the government agreed to in return for a service performed.
A subsidy is payment over and beyond what was agreed to and needed to continue agreed upon work.

Reduce the work levels at any area and there will be impacts beyond costs.

 

[Socio]

Legal immigrants should be allowed to have access.

I would like the rules to be enforced that the people that sponsor the immigrants are required to provide the support that they signed for.

There are documents that are signed stating a immigrant will not be needing support of the government for x years. financial documents need to be provided showing that the sponsor has the resources to support/provide.

Is this another case of the immigration law not being enforced?

Right it is against the law, one of the stipulations for being allow entrance is to not to become a ward of the state.

www.cato.org/pubs/journal/cj32n1/cj32n1-11.pdf

Title IV of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity
Reconciliation Act of 1996 has made it difficult for legal permanent
residents in the United States to live as wards of the state. The law,
also known as the 1996 Welfare Reform Act, states that “selfsufficiency
has been a basic principle of United States immigration​

law.”

The law bars newly legalized permanent residents from eligibility
for a range of federal income support programs for at least the first
five years of their residency. Those programs include Temporary
Assistance for Needy Families, Food Stamps, Supplemental Security
Income,Medicaid (Full-Scope),and the Children’s Health Insurance​

Program (Anderson 2010: 198).

Once an immigrant becomes a naturalized citizen, he or she is​

eligible for the same benefits available to native-born Americans.

So really if you are a legal immigrant and on welfare it could and should be grounds for deportation.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Providing access and encouraging new immigrants to use welfare benefits as soon as they arrive are two COMPLETELY different things.

No in fact it is against the law, one of the stipulations for being allow entrance is to not to become a ward of the state.

www.cato.org/pubs/journal/cj32n1/cj32n1-11.pdf



So really if you are a legal immigrant and on welfare it could and should be grounds for deportation.

This I agree for both quotes

Encouragement is not needed; they are supposed to be here standing on their own not dependant on government help.

So who is breaking the law and who within the government is again not enforcing it.

 

[EagleKeeper]

A person immigrants as a fiance(e); gets a good job, but the sponsor is killed before marriage.

That person gets sent back even though they can stand on their own financially.

Is that right?

 

[Ausm]

Define subsidy?

contract for military equipment?
contract for R&D?
contract for training
contract for support?

Each is a contract; not a subsidy.
It is something that the government agreed to in return for a service performed.
A subsidy is payment over and beyond what was agreed to and needed to continue agreed upon work.

Reduce the work levels at any area and there will be impacts beyond costs.

Anything that would piss you and your fellow Rightwingers off the most.

 

[1prophet]

Anything that would piss you and your fellow Rightwingers off the most.

Would you also cut off your nose in order to spite your face.

 

[blackangst1]

A person immigrants as a fiance(e); gets a good job, but the sponsor is killed before marriage.

That person gets sent back even though they can stand on their own financially.

Is that right?

No. They can petition for removal of stipulations and get a 10 year green card (a.k.a. permanent residency).

As a side note, this would be a very rare situation. Fiancee visa stipulates marriage must take place within 90 days. Very unlikely an immigrant would get a SSN and a job within 90 days. Not impossible, but certainly not the norm. Especially if fiancee doesnt drive, etc.

 

[EagleKeeper]

No. They can petition for removal of stipulations and get a 10 year green card (a.k.a. permanent residency).

As a side note, this would be a very rare situation. Fiancee visa stipulates marriage must take place within 90 days. Very unlikely an immigrant would get a SSN and a job within 90 days. Not impossible, but certainly not the norm. Especially if fiancee doesnt drive, etc.

I have seen articles in Fla with respect to that situation.
A second was military; guy was sent overseas on emergency deployment and did not make it back.
Both times the lady was professionally educated and had a position wll into the 5 figures.

Also, I used the wrong phrasing
Is that fair vs is that right

 

[EagleKeeper]

Anything that would piss you and your fellow Rightwingers off the most.

But you refused to answer the question - good

 

[MooseNSquirrel]

Half the recipients of food stamps are children and the majority of those are in GOP dominated areas.

Why does the GOP want Republican children to starve?

Why the outrage over a 133 a month subsidy?

Where's the outrage over Medicare part D?

The government has all kinds of programs for individuals and businesses which result in a subsidy, where's the outrage over that?

Let me throw a few words out there:

Demagoguery, hypocrisy, cluelessness...

 

[nehalem256]

Half the recipients of food stamps are children and the majority of those are in GOP dominated areas.

Why does the GOP want Republican children to starve?

Why will children starve? Are you suggesting women cannot be trusted to make the right choice for their family?

Why the outrage over a 133 a month subsidy?

Because it adds up to 75B+.

Coincidentally I believe that is more than is spent on bush tax cuts for the rich. Why are liberals so outraged over them?