Current Immigration Law

[Polk]

Once again, children are not their own parents.

Why can't liberals directly answer a simple question? Would the immigrant get a visa if they don't meet the income levels to provide for the family? A simple yes or no is all that is required.

Because it's not a simple question. It has a pretty huge unstated premise that's dishonest.

 

[Vel]

Once again, children are not their own parents.

Why can't liberals directly answer a simple question? Would the immigrant get a visa if they don't meet the income levels to provide for the family? A simple yes or no is all that is required.

Because it's not a simple question. It has a pretty huge unstated premise that's dishonest.

It's a very simple question. You just don't like the answer.

 

[Polk]

As currently proposed, the visa would require the immigrant not be the recipient of public funds. Their children, who as separate people, would still be eligible for public assistance on equal footing with every other citizen.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Heard today that the new immigration bill is a big Christmas present for Halliburton. I don't know about that (though I suspect its true because the Rs are still in the discussion) but, from what I've heard, it answers almost nothing.

 

[Socio]

Requires that persons who are in the U.S. illegally must return to their home countries and wait ten years before applying for a visa. Since deporting 10+ million people is not feasible, why not require registration and proof of ten years of self support before eligibility for any government programs (children exempted)? Failure to register would result in deportation, and illegal return to the U.S. after deportation would become a felony. What say you?

You realize that immigrants aren't eligible for public benefits under the proposals being discussed, correct?

Actually the under the proposals being discussed they will not be eligible for "Federal" assistance however their children born here will be. This is how most get on the Federal welfare roles as it is anyway. They will also still be eligible for State welfare programs many of which federal funds are funneled to.

So in reality these proposals being discussed are nothing more than sleight of hand, made to sound good but are absolutely meaningless!

 

[Polk]

Requires that persons who are in the U.S. illegally must return to their home countries and wait ten years before applying for a visa. Since deporting 10+ million people is not feasible, why not require registration and proof of ten years of self support before eligibility for any government programs (children exempted)? Failure to register would result in deportation, and illegal return to the U.S. after deportation would become a felony. What say you?

You realize that immigrants aren't eligible for public benefits under the proposals being discussed, correct?

Actually the under the proposals being discussed they will not be eligible for "Federal" assistance however their children born here will be. This is how most get on the Federal welfare roles as it is anyway. They will also still be eligible for State welfare programs many of which federal funds are funneled to.

So in reality these proposals being discussed are nothing more than sleight of hand, made to sound good but are absolutely meaningless!

States are free to set their own eligibility requirements for their programs, which are financed by local funds approved by local voters.

 

[Socio]

You realize that immigrants aren't eligible for public benefits under the proposals being discussed, correct?

Actually the under the proposals being discussed they will not be eligible for "Federal" assistance however their children born here will be. This is how most get on the Federal welfare roles as it is anyway. They will also still be eligible for State welfare programs many of which federal funds are funneled to.

So in reality these proposals being discussed are nothing more than sleight of hand, made to sound good but are absolutely meaningless!

States are free to set their own eligibility requirements for their programs, which are financed by local funds approved by local voters.

Some not all like, TANF and SSBG, which fund a lot of different services/programs at the State level for example, even Medicaid which is administered by the States and funded in part by the Federal funds.

 

[Polk]

Actually the under the proposals being discussed they will not be eligible for "Federal" assistance however their children born here will be. This is how most get on the Federal welfare roles as it is anyway. They will also still be eligible for State welfare programs many of which federal funds are funneled to.

So in reality these proposals being discussed are nothing more than sleight of hand, made to sound good but are absolutely meaningless!

States are free to set their own eligibility requirements for their programs, which are financed by local funds approved by local voters.

Some not all like, TANF and SSBG, which fund a lot of different services/programs at the State level for example, even Medicaid which is administered by the States and funded in part by the Federal funds.

Benefits beyond the federal package are paid for with state funds.