August 13, 2009

D.A. King in today’s Gwinnett Daily Post: Guest column – Illegals aren’t owed coverage by Uncle Sam

Posted by D.A. King at 10:10 am - Email the author   Print This Post Print This Post  

Gwinnett Daily Post

Illegals aren’t owed coverage by Uncle Sam
D.A. King
August 13, 2009

In the now-desperate rush by the Obama administration to take over American health care, we should be asking how the millions of illegal aliens in America fit in.

What about the illegals and government-provided health coverage?

The answer depends on who you can hear.

Many readers have not heard about Georgia Rep. Nathan Deal’s amendment to a version of “the health care reform bill” (HR 3200). The bill lacks language that would prevent illegal aliens from accessing Obama’s proposed universal coverage.

Using the federal Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE)ā€ˆdatabase, Deal’s amendment would require states to verify an individual’s citizenship status before automatically enrolling them in the government-run option. The horror. The amendment was narrowly defeated 29-28. The Democrats win.

Welcome to one of the best-kept secrets you will not hear much about from the “mainstream media.” The same out-of-control government that has failed to secure American borders or enforce American immigration laws is trying to take charge of your health care – and most members of the ruling party want to extend that national health insurance to millions of these victims of geography.

According to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection, more than a million people were apprehended trying to enter the U.S. illegally in 2008. Optimistic estimates are that we catch one of every three or four illegal crossers. Do the math.

As Roy Beck, executive director of the respected Washington pro-immigration control organization NumbersUSA, notes, “It is the growth among the uninsured that is helping drive the political effort to change the health care system. Previous studies have shown that illegal aliens account for nearly all of the growth in the uninsured in recent years.”

We are “importing the uninsured,” writes James Edwards in National Review.

If you think health care is expensive now, wait until it is government-controlled – and officially available to anyone who can unlawfully slip into the U.S. in search of a better life. Not exactly a deterrent to future illegal immigration.

Congressional Budget Director Douglas Elmendorf testified before the Senate Budget Committee and warned lawmakers that the proposed “legislation significantly expands the federal responsibility for health care costs.”

At least one Democrat has expressed concerns. Sen. Max Baucus of Montana, the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, told reporters in May illegals would not be included. “We’re not going to cover undocumented aliens, undocumented workers,” Baucus told the Dallas Morning News. “That’s too politically explosive.”

Like most who study the illegal immigration crisis, Baucus, a key Democrat in the health care debate, likely understands that according to analyses by the Center for Immigration Studies and the U.S. Census Bureau, somewhere around 22 percent of the uninsured “Americans” are not Americans at all. They are non-citizens, many here in violation of our American immigration laws.

Something else you will not hear: One well-funded separatist group working hard to make this little known scam become reality is the radical open-borders National Council of La Raza (in English, “The National Council of The Race”).

La Raza seminars offer instructions like: “you must go out into your communities, use words like ‘streamline’, use phrases like ‘all workers’ and ‘all families,’ because if the American people find out that this bill is about giving health care to non-citizens, they will rise up against it.”

Indeed.

D.A. King, a nationally recognized authority on illegal immigration, is the president of the Georgia-based Dustin Inman Society, which advocates for enforcement of American immigration laws. The organization’s Web site is www.thedustininmansociety.org.

HERE

August 12, 2009

Mission creep and the Southern Poverty Law Center’s misguided focus

Posted by D.A. King at 3:52 pm - Email the author   Print This Post Print This Post  

Carol M. Swain — Huffington Post

Mission creep and the Southern Poverty Law Center’s misguided focus

…There is a name for what has happened. It is called “mission creep.” Mission creep occurs when an organization strays beyond its original purpose and engages in actions antithetical to its goals. Rather than monitoring hate groups, the Southern Poverty Law Center has become one…

HERE

FAST FACT: Obama administration has deported twice as many illegal aliens so far this year as Bush did in same time frame last year – NEW YORK TIMES

Posted by D.A. King at 3:47 pm - Email the author   Print This Post Print This Post  

From the New York Times on Obama and Napolitano: HERE (Thanks to Jerry and Sam!)

“Immigration agents have arrested 181,000 illegal immigrants and deported 215,000 people so far this year. Both figures are double what they were for the same period two years ago, she said…

Finite resources, Public Benefits, the Technical College System of Georgia, lawyer Kristi Carman and Commissioner Ron Jackson vs federal and state law – the saga continues. Here are two response letters to my open records requests from lawyer Carman –

Posted by D.A. King at 3:38 pm - Email the author   Print This Post Print This Post  

Response to my open records requests HERE and HERE

The beginning of the story HERE.

(c) ā€œFederal public benefitā€ defined
(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), for purposes of this chapter the term ā€œFederal public benefitā€ meansā€”
(A) any grant, contract, loan, professional license, or commercial license provided by an agency of the United States or by appropriated funds of the United States; and
(B) any retirement, welfare, health, disability, public or assisted housing, postsecondary education, food assistance, unemployment benefit, or any other similar benefit for which payments or assistance are provided to an individual, household, or family eligibility unit by an agency of the United States or by appropriated funds of the United States.

YIKES!

Atlanta Police Chief joins Jerry Gonzalez and Congressman Hank Johnson in calling for another amnesty for illegal aliens VIDEO

Posted by D.A. King at 10:09 am - Email the author   Print This Post Print This Post  

VIDEO HERE

Note to Hank Johnson: The points that Jerry Gonzalez gave you – and that you almost understood yourself – are overlooking the fact that we already have a system of legal immigration and that we take in more immigration than any nation on the planet. But not many were listening to you anyway. Yikes.

Note to CBS 46: WOW! What balance!

dak

Guidance on the Interpretation of “Federal Public Benefits” Under the Welfare Reform Law. TCSG lawyer Kristi Carman: PAY ATTENTION!

Posted by D.A. King at 10:09 am - Email the author   Print This Post Print This Post  

Guidance on the Interpretation of “Federal Public Benefits” Under the Welfare Reform Law
THIS CONTAINS INFORMATION ISSUED BY THE U.S. ADMINISTRATION FOR CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES IN LIHEAP INFORMATION MEMORANDUM TRANSMITTAL NO. LIHEAP-IM-98-25,
DATED 08/06/98

TO: LOW INCOME HOME ENERGY ASSISTANCE
PROGRAM (LIHEAP) GRANTEES AND OTHER INTERESTED
PARTIES

SUBJECT: Guidance on the Interpretation of “Federal
Public Benefits” Under the Welfare Reform Law

RELATED
REFERENCES: Low Income Home Energy Assistance Act, Title XXVI
of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981,
Public Law 97-35, as amended; the Personal
Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation
Act of 1996 (PRWORA), Public Law 104-193, signed
into law on August 22, 1996; Federal Register
notice dated August 26, 1997 (62 FR 45256)
providing guidance on the definition of “Federal
Means-Tested Public Benefits” under PRWORA for HHS
programs; Federal Register notice dated August 4,
1998 (63 FR 41657) providing guidance on the
definition of “Federal Public Benefits” under
PRWORA for HHS programs; Federal Register notice
dated August 4, 1998 (63 FR 41662) from the
Department of Justice issuing a “Proposed Rule on
Verification of Eligibility for Public Benefits”
under PRWORA; and Federal Register notice dated
November 17, 1997 (62 FR 61344) from the
Department of Justice issuing “Interim Guidance on
Verification of Citizenship, Qualified Alien
Status and Eligibility Under Title IV of the
Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity
Reconciliation Act of 1996”.

PURPOSE: To advise LIHEAP grantees about decisions
made on the definition of “Federal Public
Benefits” for non-qualified aliens under the 1996
welfare reform law for HHS programs.

BACKGROUND: The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity
Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA), Public Law
104-193, was signed into law by the President on
August 22, 1996. PRWORA, popularly known as the
welfare reform law, established the Temporary
Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) program to
replace the Assistance to Families With Dependent
Children (AFDC) program. PRWORA restricts the
access of certain categories of immigrants to
specified Federal benefits, including some
benefits administered by the Department of Health
and Human Services (HHS).

Section 403 of PRWORA bars most qualified aliens
who enter the U.S. on or after enactment (August
22, 1996) from eligibility for “Federal means-tested
public benefits” for five years beginning on the
date the individual entered the United States with
a qualified alien status. As defined in a Federal
Register notice dated August 26, 1997 (62 FR 45256),
HHS interpreted “Federal means-tested public benefits”
to include only those benefits provided under Federal
means-tested, mandatory spending programs. The
following HHS programs meet this definition:
Medicaid, and Temporary Assistance for Needy
Families (TANF) Block Grant – the successor to the
AFDC program. Therefore, no other HHS programs
are “Federal means-tested public benefits” for
purposes of PRWORA, and all qualified aliens,
regardless of when they entered the U.S., continue
to be eligible to receive assistance and services
under the Low Income Home Energy Assistance
Program (LIHEAP) if they meet other program
requirements.

“Qualified aliens” are defined in section 431 of
PRWORA and cover the larger groups of legal immigrants:
(1) an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence
under the Immigration and Nationality Act (the “Act”);
(2) an alien granted asylum under section 208 of the
Act; (3) a refugee admitted to the United States
under section 207 of the Act; (4) an alien paroled
into the United States under section 212(d)(5) of
the Act for a period of at least one year; (5) an
alien whose deportation is being withheld under
section 243(h) of the Act as in effect prior to
April 1, 1997, or whose removal is being withheld
under Section 241(b)(3) of the Act; (6) an alien
granted conditional entry under section 203(a)(7)
of the Act as in effect prior to April 1, 1980;
(7) an alien who is a Cuban or Haitian entrant as
defined in section 501(e) of the Refugee Education
Assistance Act of 1980; or (8) an alien who (or
whose child or parent) has been battered or
subjected to extreme cruelty in the United States
and otherwise satisfies the requirements of 8
U.S.C. 1641(c).

We are now issuing guidance on the eligibility of
non-qualified aliens for “Federal public benefits”.

CONTENT: Section 401 of PRWORA prohibits non-qualified
aliens from receiving any “Federal public
benefits”. On August 4, 1998, HHS published a
notice in the Federal Register (63 FR 41657)
identifying 31 HHS programs that provide Federal
public benefits, and which therefore non-qualified
aliens may not receive. With a number of
important exceptions discussed below, grantees
under these programs are required to verify
immigration and citizenship status of applicants
in order to ensure that non-qualified aliens do
not receive the programs’ benefits and services.
Also in the Federal Register dated August 4, 1998
(63 FR 41662), the Department of Justice published
a “Proposed Rule on Verification of Eligibility
for Public Benefits”.

The Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program
(LIHEAP) has been determined to be a Federal public
benefit as defined in title IV of PRWORA, and thus
is one of the programs listed in the HHS notice.
Accordingly, LIHEAP grantees are required to implement
the verification requirements, in order to ensure
that non-qualified aliens do not receive LIHEAP
benefits. There are some exceptions to the verification
requirements, however, as noted below.

Agencies providing Federal public benefits must be
in full compliance with the verification requirements
within 2 years of publication of a Justice final
rule. Until a final rule is published, verification
of alien status may be carried out using the Justice
Department’s proposed final rule or the Interim
Guidance on Verification of Citizenship, Qualified
Alien Status and Eligibility Under Title IV of the
Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity
Reconciliation Act of 1996, which Justice published
earlier in the Federal Register at 62 FR 61344 on
November 17, 1997. A copy of Justice’s proposed
rule and the Interim Guidance may be obtained from
the Federal Register website at “www.access.gpo.gov/nara”.

EXCEPTIONS TO VERIFICATION REQUIREMENTS

Under section 432(d) of PRWORA (as amended by section
508 of the Illegal Immigration and Immigrant Responsibility
Act of 1996, Public Law 104-208), providers who are
nonprofit charitable organizations are not required
to determine, verify, or otherwise require proof of
eligibility of any applicant for benefits even if they
are providers of Federal public benefits as identified
in the Federal Register notice.

Providers should also be aware of important exemptions
to the verification requirements established by PRWORA
and clarified by the Department of Justice in its
Interim Guidance (62 FR 61344, November 17, 1997)
and in the Proposed Rule (63 FR 41662, August 4, 1998).
These exemptions include those for: the provision
of in-kind, community based services which are necessary
for the protection of life and safety; the provision
of emergency medical care and certain other immunizations
and treatments; and the protection of battered alien
spouses, battered alien children, the alien parents
of battered children, and alien children of battered
parents who fit certain criteria.

LIHEAP has been determined to be a Federal public
benefit as defined in title IV of PRWORA and, therefore,
LIHEAP grantees are required to implement the new
verification requirements promulgated by the Department
of Justice. However, not all services provided under
LIHEAP are considered Federal public benefits because
some services provided with LIHEAP funds are not
provided to individual, household, or family eligibility
units, and therefore do not constitute Federal public
benefits that are subject to verification requirements.
Accordingly, we encourage LIHEAP grantees to review
and understand these important exemptions.

For example, the guidance means that a LIHEAP grantee
would not need to verify eligibility or deny benefits
to non-qualified aliens who wish to use a cooling
center set up to provide relief to citizens suffering
during hot weather, if the grantee does not verify income
for users of the cooling center. In addition, many
LIHEAP grantees use rules of the Department of
Energy’s Low Income Weatherization Assistance
Program in administering their LIHEAP funds spent
on weatherization. Under the DOE rules, a multi-
unit building may be weatherized if residents in
2/3 of the units are eligible for assistance (1/2
in the case of a 4-unit building). While determinations
would need to be made to ensure that 2/3 of the units
meet the criteria for assistance, a non-qualified alien
could be the recipient of weatherization assistance as
part of the up to 1/3 of the building’s households that
are not eligible.

REQUEST FOR COMMENTS

The HHS interpretation of Federal public benefits published
in the Federal Register is a notice that is effective
on August 4, 1998, the date of publication. However,
HHS would like to receive any comments you may have on
it, and may revise the interpretation based on comments.
Comments must be submitted no later than 5:00 p.m. on
October 5, 1998, and should be sent to the following address:

Division of Economic Support for Families
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation
Department of Health and Human Services
Room 404E
200 Independence Avenue, S.W.
Washington, DC 20201
Attention: Colleen Curtin Rathgeb

Inquiries about the HHS interpretation may be directed
to Colleen Curtin Rathgeb at 202/401-6639

The Department of Justice published a Proposed Rule
on Verification of Eligibility for Public Benefits in
the Federal Register on August 4, 1998 (63 FR 41662),
and has also provided a 60-day comment period, which
ends on October 5, 1998. Comments on the Proposed Rule
should be sent directly to the address indicated in
the Proposed Rule.

ATTACHMENT: Federal Register notice dated August 4, 1998 (63 FR 41657)
providing guidance on the definition of “Federal Public
Benefits” under PRWORA for HHS programs.

INQUIRIES TO: Janet M. Fox, Director
Division of Energy Assistance
Office of Community Services, ACF, HHS
370 L’Enfant Promenade, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20447
Telephone: (202) 401-9351
Fax: (202) 401-5718

_____________/s______________
Janet M. Fox
Director
Division of Energy Assistance
Office of Community Services

[Federal Register: August 4, 1998 (Volume 63, Number 14)]
[Notices]
[Page 41657-41661]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr04au98-135]

[[Page 41657]]

_______________________________________________________________________

Part III

Department of Health and Human Services

Department of Justice
_______________________________________________________________________

8 CFR Part 104

Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996
(PRWORA): Federal Public Benefit Interpretation; Notice Eligibility for
Public Benefits Verification; Proposed Rule

[[Page 41658]]

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Office of the Secretary

Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act
of 1996 (PRWORA); Interpretation of “Federal Public Benefit”

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, HHS.

ACTION: Notice with comment period.

———————————————————————–

SUMMARY: This notice with comment period interprets the term “Federal
public benefit” as used in Title IV of the Personal Responsibility and
Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA), Pub. L. 104-193,
and identifies the HHS programs that provide such benefits under this
interpretation. According to section 401 of PRWORA, aliens who are not
“qualified aliens” are not eligible for any “Federal public
benefit,” unless the “Federal public benefit” falls within a
specified exception. A “Federal public benefit” includes “any grant,
contract, loan, professional license, or commercial license” provided
to an individual, and also “any retirement, welfare, health,
disability, public or assisted housing, postsecondary education, food
assistance, unemployment benefit, or any other similar benefit for
which payments or assistance are provided to an individual, household,
or family eligibility unit.” Under section 432, providers of a non-
exempt “Federal public benefit” must verify that a person applying
for the benefit is a qualified alien and is eligible to receive the
benefit.
The HHS programs that provide “Federal public benefits” and are
not otherwise excluded from the definition by the exceptions provided
in section 401(b) are:

Adoption Assistance
Administration on Developmental Disabilities (ADD)–State
Developmental Disabilities Councils (direct services only)
ADD–Special Projects (direct services only)
ADD–University Affiliated Programs (clinical disability assessment
services only)
Adult Programs/Payments to Territories
Agency for Health Care Policy and Research Dissertation Grants
Child Care and Development Fund
Clinical Training Grant for Faculty Development in Alcohol & Drug
Abuse
Foster Care
Health Profession Education and Training Assistance
Independent Living Program
Job Opportunities for Low Income Individuals (JOLI)
Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP)
Medicare
Medicaid (except assistance for an emergency medical condition)
Mental Health Clinical Training Grants
Native Hawaiian Loan Program
Refugee Cash Assistance
Refugee Medical Assistance
Refugee Preventive Health Services Program
Refugee Social Services Formula Program
Refugee Social Services Discretionary Program
Refugee Targeted Assistance Formula Program
Refugee Targeted Assistance Discretionary Program
Refugee Unaccompanied Minors Program
Refugee Voluntary Agency Matching Grant Program
Repatriation Program
Residential Energy Assistance Challenge Option (REACH)
Social Services Block Grant (SSBG)
State Child Health Insurance Program (CHIP)
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)

While all of these programs provide “Federal public benefits”
this does not mean that all benefits or services provided under these
programs are “Federal public benefits.” As discussed in sections II
and III below, some benefits or services under these programs may not
be provided to an “individual, household, or family eligibility unit”
and, therefore, do not constitute “Federal public benefits” as
defined by PRWORA.

DATES: Effective Date: This notice is effective on August 4, 1998.

COMMENT PERIOD: Written comments will be considered if we receive them
at the appropriate address, as provided in the ADDRESSES section below,
no later than 5 p.m. on October 5, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Mail comments (1 original and 3 copies) to the following
address: Division of Economic Support for Families, Office of the
Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, Department of Health
and Human Services, Room 404E, 200 Independence Ave., SW, Washington,
DC 20201, Attention: Colleen Curtin Rathgeb.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Colleen Curtin Rathgeb, (202) 401-
6639.
Copies of comments may be inspected at the above address. Inquiries
regarding how a particular program is affected by this notice should be
submitted to DHHS program staff responsible for managing the program at
either the appropriate Regional Office, or Headquarters in Washington,
D.C. The above contact should be used only to submit general comments
regarding the policy interpretation contained in this notice.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

Section 401 of PRWORA provides that an alien who is not a qualified
alien, as defined in section 431 of PRWORA, is not eligible, with
certain specified exceptions, for any “Federal public benefit.”
PRWORA, as amended by section 501 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and
Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA), Pub. L 104-208, and by
sections 5302 and 5571 of the Balanced Budget Act of 1997, Pub. L 105-
33, defines “qualified alien” as an alien who, at the time the alien
applies for, receives or attempts to receive a public benefit, is (1)
an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence under the
Immigration and Nationality Act (the “Act”); (2) an alien granted
asylum under Section 208 of the Act; (3) a refugee admitted to the
United States under Section 207 of the Act; (4) an alien paroled into
the United States under Section 212(d)(5) of the Act for a period of at
least one year; (5) an alien whose deportation is being withheld under
Section 243(h) of the Act as in effect prior to April 1, 1997, or whose
removal is being withheld under Section 241(b)(3) of the Act; (6) an
alien granted conditional entry under Section 203(a)(7) of the Act as
in effect prior to April 1, 1980; (7) an alien who is a Cuban Haitian
entrant as defined in Section 501(e) of the Refugee Education
Assistance Act of 1980; or (8) an alien who (or whose child or parent)
has been battered or subjected to extreme cruelty in the United States
and otherwise satisfies the requirements of 8 U.S.C. 1641(c).
Section 401(c) of PRWORA defines “Federal public benefit” as:
“(A) any grant, contract, loan, professional license or commercial
license provided by an agency of the United States or by appropriated
funds of the United States; and (B) any retirement, welfare, health,
disability, public or assisted housing, postsecondary education, food
assistance, unemployment benefit, or any other similar benefit for
which payments or assistance are provided to an individual, household,
or family eligibility unit by an agency of the United States or by
appropriated funds of the United States.” Section 432 of PRWORA as
amended by section 504 of IIRIRA and section 5572 of the Balanced
Budget Act of 1997, further requires that certain providers of
“Federal public benefits” verify the citizenship or immigration
status of an individual applying for a “Federal public benefit” for
purposes of establishing eligibility unless the benefit falls within a
specific exemption.

[[Page 41659]]

Although section 401(b) of PRWORA identifies specific types of
benefits and services that are explicitly exempted from these new
requirements, PRWORA does not identify the specific benefits that are
“Federal public benefits,” and the definition in section 401(c),
standing alone, does not provide sufficient guidance for benefit
providers to make that determination. In order to facilitate compliance
with the verification requirement in Section 432, the Department and
other Federal agencies should interpret the term. (See the Department
of Justice’s “Proposed Rule on Verification of Eligibility for Public
Benefits” published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register
and “Interim Guidance on Verification of Citizenship, Qualified Alien
Status and Eligibility Under Title IV of the Personal Responsibility
and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996” 62 FR (November 17,
1997) pp. 61344-61416.)

II. Interpretation

“Federal public benefits” that fall within Part A of the
definition (i.e., “any grant, contract, loan, professional license, or
commercial license provided by an agency of the United States or by
appropriated funds of the United States”) generally include agreements
or arrangements between Federally funded programs and individuals, such
as research grants, student loans, or patent licenses. For example, the
Native Hawaiian Loan Program and the Repatriation Program are “Federal
public benefits” because, as loan programs, they meet the statutory
definition’s criteria under Part A. Similarly, the term “grant” in
Part A refers to financial awards to individuals; it does not include
so-called “block grants” which are provided to states or localities,
since that would give the word an entirely different meaning than the
other terms in that Part. (This interpretation follows the traditional
canon of statutory construction, noscitur a sociis, that provides that
“words grouped in a list should be given related meaning.” Dole v.
United Steelworkers of America, 494 U.S. 26, 36 (1989) (citing
Massachusetts v. Morash, 490 U.S. 107, 114-15 (1989) (quoting Schreiber
v. Burlington, 472 U.S. 1, 8 (1985).)
If a benefit does not fall within Part A of the definition, it must
be determined whether the benefit is a “Federal public benefit” under
Part B: “any retirement, welfare, health, disability, public or
assisted housing, postsecondary education, food assistance,
unemployment benefit, or any other similar benefit for which payments
or assistance are provided to an individual, household, or family
eligibility unit by an agency of the United States or by appropriated
funds of the United States.”
To qualify as a “Federal public benefit” under Part B, a benefit
must satisfy two conditions. First, the benefit must be one of those
enumerated in section 401(c)(1)(B), that is, a “retirement, welfare,
health, disability, public or assisted housing, postsecondary
education, food assistance, [or] unemployment benefit,” or be a
“similar benefit.” Second, a program’s benefits or assistance must be
provided to an “individual, household or family eligibility unit by an
agency of the United States or by appropriated funds of the United
States.”
Although the litany of categories in 401(c)(1)(B) is broad, it is
not comprehensive and clearly excludes certain categories from the
definition. For example, by explicitly identifying “postsecondary
education” the statute excludes non-postsecondary education programs,
such as Head Start and elementary and secondary education.
With respect to the second condition, the phrase “individual,
household, or family eligibility unit” is particularly ambiguous and
requires clarification. At the outset we interpret the phrase to narrow
the set of benefits that fall within Part B of the definition. This
point is best illustrated by comparing “Federal public benefits” in
PRWORA to the term “Federal benefit” in IIRIRA. Section 561 of IIRIRA
contained a provision that increased criminal penalties for forging
Federal documents in order to prevent the fraudulent receipt of
“Federal benefits.”
“Federal benefit” is defined in IIRIRA as: “(A) the issuance of
any grant, contract, loan, professional license, or commercial license
provided by an agency of the United States or by appropriated funds of
the United States; and (B) any retirement, welfare, Social Security,
health (including treatment of an emergency medical condition in
accordance with section 1903(v) of the Social Security Act (19 USC
1396b(v)), disability, veterans, public housing, education, food
stamps, or unemployment benefit, or any similar benefit for which
payments or assistance are provided by an agency of the United States
or by appropriated funds of the United States.” IIRIRA’s definition of
“Federal benefit” is nearly the same as PRWORA’s definition of
“Federal public benefit” but with some significant differences.
First, the definition of “Federal benefit” contained a more
comprehensive list of benefits than that found in PRWORA’s definition
of “Federal public benefit.” Second, the “Federal benefit”
definition did not include the phrase “individual, household, or
family eligibility unit.” The term “Federal public benefit,”
therefore, should be construed more narrowly than “Federal benefit.”
In addition, the PRWORA Conference Report contains language confirming
the limiting effect of the phrase “individual, household, or family
eligibility unit.” In describing the application of the “Federal
public benefit” definition to one particular program–Title I, Part A
of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA)–the conference
report stated that it was “[t]he intent of the conferees” that it
“not be affected by section 401 because the benefit is not provided to
an individual, household, or family eligibility unit.” [H.R.
Conference Report No. 104-725 at 380 (1996) (emphasis added)]. Given
Congress’ assessment that the benefits conferred under the ESEA are not
provided to “individual, household, or family eligibility units,”
ESEA benefits are not “federal public benefits.” In sum, these points
confirm that Congress included the phrase “individual, household, or
family eligibility unit” in the definition in order to limit those
benefits that would not be available to non-qualified aliens.
We interpret the phrase “individual, household, or family
eligibility unit” to refer to benefits that are (1) provided to an
individual, household, or family, and (2) the individual, household, or
family must, as a condition of receipt, meet specified criteria (e.g.,
a specified income level or residency) in order to be conferred the
benefit, that is, they must be an “eligibility unit.” Such benefits
do not include benefits that are generally targeted to communities or
specified sectors of the population (e.g., people with particular
physical conditions, such as a disability or disease; gender; general
age groups, such as youth or elderly). For example, in order for a
program to be determined to provide benefits to “eligibility units”
the authorizing statute must be interpreted to mandate ineligibility
for individuals, households, or families that do not meet certain
criteria, such as a specified income level or a specified age.
Many HHS programs are targeted to meet the needs of certain
populations such as children or pregnant women. But unless the
authorizing statutes require that the characteristics of these groups
form the basis for denial of services or benefits, these are not
benefits that go to “eligibility units.” The authorizing statutes of
these programs identify populations with specific characteristics to
clarify the types of services that should be

[[Page 41660]]

provided; they do not contemplate that providers use variations in
individual characteristics as a basis for determining eligibility, on a
case by case basis. Therefore a benefit targeted to certain populations
based on their characteristics, such as a benefit provided under the
Maternal and Child Health program, which provides health services to
women and children, is not a “Federal public benefit.”
Some programs may provide a mixture of services, some of which are
provided to “individual, household, or family eligibility units,” and
others that are provided to communities or specified sectors of the
population. Programs that are primarily designed to target and provide
services to communities should not be burdened with new verification
procedures merely because they may include some services that flow more
directly to the individual, household or family. Therefore, we have
determined that a preponderance of a program’s services must be
provided to individual, household, or family eligibility units in order
to be considered a “Federal public benefit” program under this
Notice.

III. HHS Programs

After a review of HHS programs, we have determined that the
following programs provide “Federal public benefits,” are not
otherwise excepted from the eligibility restrictions imposed by 401(a)
of PRWORA:

Adoption Assistance
Administration on Developmental Disabilities (ADD)–State
Developmental
Disabilities Councils (direct services only)
ADD–Special Projects (direct services only)
ADD–University Affiliated Programs (clinical disability assessment
services only)
Adult Programs/Payments to Territories
Agency for Health Care Policy and Research Dissertation Grants
Child Care and Development Fund
Clinical Training Grant for Faculty Development in Alcohol & Drug
Abuse
Foster Care
Health Profession Education and Training Assistance
Independent Living Program
Job Opportunities for Low Income Individuals (JOLI)
Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP)
Medicare
Medicaid (except assistance for an emergency medical condition)
Mental Health Clinical Training Grants
Native Hawaiian Loan Program
Refugee Cash Assistance
Refugee Medical Assistance
Refugee Preventive Health Services Program
Refugee Social Services Formula Program
Refugee Social Services Discretionary Program
Refugee Targeted Assistance Formula Program
Refugee Targeted Assistance Discretionary Program
Refugee Unaccompanied Minors Program
Refugee Voluntary Agency Matching Grant Program
Repatriation Program
Residential Energy Assistance Challenge Option (REACH)
Social Services Block Grant (SSBG)
State Child Health Insurance Program (CHIP)
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)

This does not mean, however, that all benefits or services provided
by these programs are “Federal public benefits” and require
verification. For example, some states may provide LIHEAP funds for
weatherization of multi-unit buildings. These funds would not be
considered a “Federal public benefit” since the eligibility of
individuals, households, or family units is not considered in
determining whether such funds will be used to improve the building.
Other programs that have been determined to provide “Federal public
benefits” under this Notice should consult their Federal program
administrators if it is believed that some of the program’s services do
not constitute “Federal public benefits.”
Although SSBG does not have statutorily mandated eligibility
criteria and therefore would not be included in our definition of
“Federal public benefits” as explained in section III above, its
inclusion in section 402 as a “federally designated program” for
which States can determine the eligibility of qualified aliens suggests
that the SSBG program be classified as providing “Federal public
benefits.” Otherwise, we would leave open the possibility of a state
denying qualified aliens SSBG benefits or services while maintaining
access to such benefits or services to non-qualified aliens.
Services or benefits that are wholly funded by state or local
governments may be “state or local public benefit(s)” as defined in
section 411(c) of PRWORA. However, services or benefits that are wholly
or partially funded with HHS resources must comply with the
interpretation provided in this Notice.
The Department of Justice issued a Notice, dated November 17, 1997,
entitled “Interim Guidance on Verification of Citizenship, Qualified
Alien Status and Eligibility Under Title IV of the Personal
Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996”, at 62
Fed Reg 61344 (the “Interim Guidance”) to assist affected providers
in performing the verification procedures necessary to determine which
aliens are “qualified aliens”. Providers are encouraged to review
that guidance in order to understand the several important exemptions
detailed there. These exemptions include those for: nonprofit
charitable organizations; the provision of emergency medical care and
certain other immunizations and treatments; the protection of certain
battered aliens, and the provision of in-kind, community based services
that are not contingent on income or resources and are necessary for
the protection of life and safety. Further information regarding these
exemptions is included below (section IV).

IV. Exemptions

Congress created specific exemptions to the verification
requirements. Therefore, in addition to the programs identified above,
some HHS programs have eligibility requirements in statute but are
otherwise specifically exempted under the provisions of section 401(b).
Section 401(b)(1)(C), exempts “public health assistance…for
immunizations with respect to immunizable diseases and for testing and
treatment of symptoms of communicable diseases whether or not such
symptoms are caused by a communicable disease.” This exemption,
designed to protect public health, excludes some HHS programs from the
definition of “Federal public benefits.”
Services or assistance specified by the Attorney General that (i)
deliver in-kind services at the community level; (ii) do not condition
the provision of assistance, the amount of assistance provided, or the
cost of assistance provided on the individual recipient’s income or
resources; and (iii) are necessary for the protection of life or safety
are also exempted. The Attorney General published general guidance on
August 30th, 1996 regarding which types of services and benefits meet
these criteria at 61 FR 45985. We have reviewed our programs and have
determined that a number of programs meet this criteria.
Section 432(d) of PRWORA (added by Section 508 of IIRIRA) exempts
all providers that are nonprofit charitable organizations from these
verification rules, even if they provide services or benefits funded by
the HHS programs identified in this notice. Refer to the Department of
Justice’s Interim Guidance for more information on the applicability of
these exemptions.

V. Comment Period and Effective Date

Although HHS is soliciting public comment on this interpretation,
we believe that it is necessary to apply this interpretation to HHS
programs immediately, prior to receipt and consideration of any
comments.

[[Page 41661]]

PRWORA was enacted in August, 1996, and since that time HHS has
received numerous inquiries regarding the application of the term
“Federal public benefit.” Additional delay will cause costly,
unnecessary and/or incorrect administrative actions by agencies or
entities that administer our programs. We also believe it is possible
that due to confusion about the application of the term “Federal
public benefit” people may have been denied critical benefits and
services for which, under this interpretation, they are eligible.
Without prompt issuance of this interpretation, state and local
governments and other public and private benefit providers will remain
confused over how to implement the requirements of Title IV of PRWORA.
Finally, some states have indicated their intention to define the term
“Federal public benefit” on their own if Federal guidance is not
forthcoming soon. Independent interpretations by states will only
compound the confusion on this issue since there is no certainty that
each state will arrive at the same definition of the term. In sum,
although we are providing a 60-day period for public comment, this
interpretation is effective immediately.

VI. Economic Impact

The Department has analyzed the costs and benefits of this notice
to determine whether it has a substantial economic effect on the
economy as a whole, on states, or on small entities. The purpose of
this analysis was to identify less burdensome or more beneficial
alternatives and thereby to influence the requirements imposed by the
notice. This interpretation requires verification only for those
activities within programs that have eligibility units defined by
statutory eligibility criteria. Otherwise, a great deal of needless and
costly verification might have been undertaken.
PRWORA creates major economic effects, a large portion of which
results from changes in the law relating to immigrants’ eligibility for
Federal benefits. However, these effects are essentially due to other
provisions of PRWORA, such as sections 402, 403 and 421, which alter
the eligibility rules for certain mandatory spending programs and are
largely in effect. This Notice provides clarifying guidance as to which
HHS programs are subject to the existing PRWORA requirements regarding
immigrants’ eligibility for “Federal public benefits,” thereby
avoiding confusion among administering agencies, grantee agencies,
benefit providers, and the public on the question of which programs
must institute new eligibility and verification procedures. Therefore,
the interpretation does not have an economic impact, and it does not
affect the overall spending levels for any discretionary-funded HHS
program. Nor does this interpretation create burdens or mandates on
states or small entities.
As a result we have determined that this notice is not economically
“significant” under Executive Order 12866’s criterion of an economic
effect of more than $100 million. For the same reason, it is not
classified as a “major rule” for purposes of Congressional review
under 5 U.S.C. Sec. 801 et. seq., Subtitle E of the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121).

Dated: July 27, 1998.
Donna E. Shalala,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-20491 Filed 8-3-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-04-P

HERE

August 11, 2009

From the Washington Post via Sam Zamarripa’s GALEO stooge, Jerry Gonzalez – Time for Napolitano to shutter 287(g)

Posted by D.A. King at 11:52 am - Email the author   Print This Post Print This Post  

From the Washington Post via Sam Zamarripa’s GALEO stooge, Jerry Gonzalez

We are very proud to be so succesful in getting 287 (g) into Georgia counties, with more coming. The reason these crazies hate us and 287 (g) so much is that enforcement works at getting illegal aiens out of American communities. See HERE

and HERE dak

Time for Napolitano to shutter 287(g)
Found in www.azcentral.com
Written by Alfredo Gutierrez
Posted on 2009-08-08

Time for Napolitano to shutter 287(g)

Aug. 8, 2009 12:00 AM
Alfredo Gutierrez Special for the Republic

A little over a month ago, ACORN CEO Bertha Lewis was in Phoenix with the Rev. Al Sharpton, assuring those victimized by racial profiling that ACORN, the nation’s largest grassroots community organization of low- and moderate-income people, will stand with them every step of the way pushing for comprehensive immigration reform
.

We, along with ACORN and other community organizations, are fighting for changes that promote family unity, the public good and an end to the current police-state approach to patrolling communities of color.

Under section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, the Federal Government can authorize certain local law enforcement agencies to enforce Federal immigration laws. The 287(g) program makes it easier for local police officials to scapegoat the poor under the shadow of legality. The most extreme abuses are in our own backyard under Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio.

Sheriff Arpaio has exploited the program by using it to further his own political agenda, conducting so called “crime sweeps” exclusively in communities of color. Using precious law-enforcement resources, these dragnets result in arrests of few, if any, dangerous offenders. Instead, people of color are harassed on suspicion of minor infractions.

The most serious infractions in these raids are attributable to Sheriff Arpaio, who is violating the constitutionally guaranteed rights we all have to due process, equal protection under the law and security against unreasonable searches and seizures.

We are deeply concerned about the Department of Homeland Security’s decision to extend 287(g). We had hoped that the new secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano, would terminate the archaic policies that plagued immigration reform for so long. Instead, she has implemented inconsequential and deceptive policy changes like decreasing raids in the workplace to satisfy the public while still quietly expanding the unconstitutional 287(g) program.

By covering up plainly abusive immigration policies, Napolitano has helped to create a permanent underclass running from the law. We must push back on local immigration enforcement and urge her to show greater concern about the civil-rights violations that are continuing to grow and fester under the expansion of 287(g).

In darker times throughout our history, America has allowed for laws that discriminate against people of color, give police officials the unbridled right to rifle through citizens’ homes and criminalize entire immigrant communities. In that context, it is sadly not surprising that the 287(g) program targets racial minorities. It is time to say “No!” to the expansion of local immigration enforcement.

Each year hundreds of thousands of immigrants are being detained, deported and forced to take life-threatening risks because there is no reasonable path to achieving legal residency in the U.S. People are dying in the desert and in detention due to awful conditions and official neglect. We can and must do better.

We need to create an immigration system that upholds our shared values and promotes unity rather than racism and hatred of immigrant communities. We must integrate immigrant populations into American life rather than stigmatize these people.

By creating a rigorous registration process that will lead to lawful permanent resident status and a pathway to citizenship, we can avoid tearing families and friends apart. Putting off such reforms is unacceptable, which is why we, along with ACORN, will continue pressuring Napolitano to end abusive and counterproductive programs like 287(g). It is time for change.

Alfredo Gutierrez is a former Arizona state senator and hosts a daily talk show on Arizona’s Radio Campesina Network. He is president of Tequida & Gutierrez, a Spanish-language image, issues and advocacy firm in Phoenix. Salvador Rezas has spent years organizing day laborers and small-business owners. HERE for original GALEO post.

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/opinions/articles/2009/08/07/20090807gutierrez08.html

August 10, 2009

Cornyn to Obama: Amnesty NOW — not next year

Posted by D.A. King at 10:41 pm - Email the author   Print This Post Print This Post  

Houston Chronicle

Cornyn to Obama: Immigration reform NOW–not next year

Texas Sen. John Cornyn and President Obama don’t agree on much. One subject of common purpose: Both men want comprehensive immigration reform. — But Cornyn took strong exception today to Obama’s comment at a press conference in Guadalajara that immigration reform would have to wait until next year…

Today President Obama backtracked on his promise to address comprehensive immigration reform during his first year in office,” Cornyn said in a statement released by his office. “After stating several times on the campaign trail that it would be a ‘top priority,’ I am disappointed he has changed his tune.”
HERE

Obama, in Mexico, predicts success on health care and immigration

Posted by D.A. King at 4:29 pm - Email the author   Print This Post Print This Post  

USA Today
Obama, in Mexico, predicts success on health care and immigration

Standing beside his counterparts in Mexico and Canada, President Obama today predicted ultimate victory after a “vigorous” debate over health care, and added he is hopeful of seeing a revamped immigration system. — Immigration reform is “also in the long-term interests of the United States,” Obama said. “We have a broken immigration system. Nobody denies it.”

HERE

FAST FACT: Georgia Senator Johnny Isakson says “we still need an immigration bill that works”

Posted by D.A. King at 2:47 pm - Email the author   Print This Post Print This Post  

To the Chamber of Commerce

Marietta Daily Journal
August 5, 2009

“…Isakson spoke Monday at the Cobb Chamber of Commerce’s First Monday Breakfast series at the Atlanta Marriot Northwest, where he touched on health care, the cap and trade bill, illegal immigrants and chicken fat for fuel. Following his speech, the Journal asked the senator about Sotomayor.

“Isakson said that immigration has become less of an issue due to the strong push in 2007 to reform immigration laws. He said Mexican President Felipe Calderon’s efforts to put more military in north Mexico and the United States’ stronger patrols are “really helping.”

“But we still need an immigration bill that really works,” he said.

The senator acknowledged a renewed interest in politics among the general public, and fully supports the growing interest.

“When I was getting on a plane before the past few years of political fervor came about, people would mostly say hello and smile and wave. Now, 10 to 12 people will stop me and say, ‘I need to talk to you.’ And sometimes they are not so happy. But that’s OK. That’s great. I like that people are engaged in government more than ever before,” he said. “Ultimately, the American people own and run this country; I know that I’m the conduit and you throw the switch. As long as you make yourself heard, America will be the best place on Earth to live.”

HERE

« Previous PageNext Page »