Trump's Controversial New Plan for Legal Immigrants

Plus, what's at stake in the midterm elections By Yuval Rosenberg and Michael Rainey Trump Plans to Block Citizenship for Immigrants Who Use Public Assistance The Trump administration is finalizing a proposal that would make it more difficult for legal immigrants to get citizenship or green cards if they have ever used public assistance programs including Obamacare, food stamps and children’s health insurance, [NBC News’ Julia Ainsley reports](. The plan would reportedly also limit citizenship for immigrants who received public assistance for their children, even if those children are already citizens. The rationale: "The administration is committed to enforcing existing immigration law, which is clearly intended to protect the American taxpayer by ensuring that foreign nationals seeking to enter or remain in the U.S are self-sufficient,” a spokeswoman for the Department of Homeland Security told NBC. “Any proposed changes would ensure that the government takes the responsibility of being good stewards of taxpayer funds seriously and adjudicates immigration benefit requests in accordance with the law." The proposal, which Ainsley calls part of White House senior adviser Stephen Miller’s plan to limit the number of migrants who get legal status, likely would not have to be approved by Congress. The background: Immigration law has long held that an immigrant is to be denied permanent residence if he or she is likely to become a [“public charge.”]( Guidelines in place since 1999 have defined the term narrowly as someone who is primarily dependent on the government for subsistence, either through cash assistance programs or by receiving long-term care at government expense. The existing guidelines specify that non-cash benefits such as Medicaid, the Children’s Health Insurance Program and food programs are not part of the “public charge” determination. The Trump plan would change that, defining the term more stringently. What it means: “Using some public benefits like Social Security Insurance has already hindered immigrants from obtaining legal status in the past,” NBC’s Ainsley writes, “but the programs included in the recent draft plan could mean that immigrant households earning as much as 250 percent of the poverty level could be rejected.” Experts tell Ainsley that as many as 20 million immigrants could be affected by the Trump plan. The research: “Overall, immigrants are less likely to consume welfare benefits and, when they do, they generally consume a lower dollar value of benefits than native-born Americans,” a CATO Institute [study]( this year said. The criticism: The reported Trump administration proposal drew sharp reproach from immigration advocates and others. "Any policy forcing millions of families to choose between the denial of status and food or health care would exacerbate serious problems such as hunger, unmet health needs, child poverty and homelessness, with lasting consequences for families' wellbeing and long-term success and community prosperity," the National Immigration Law Center said in a statement to NBC. New York magazine’s Jonathan Chait [argued]( that members of the middle class who get health insurance through their employer or Medicare are getting similar taxpayer-financed benefits — demonstrating that the Trump proposal is just an empty pretense: “Programs like Obamacare and CHIP simply extend the same regimen of subsidies and risk pooling to the low-income population that have already been granted to the middle class. To define people getting insurance this way as ‘public charges’ does violence to the concept.” The Washington Post’s Paul Waldman and Greg Sargent [write]( that the proposal is a clear sign of the administration’s white nationalist agenda — and one that can work by playing into prejudices Americans have about welfare: “There’s little doubt that these initiatives are born of the sincere contempt that President Trump, Stephen Miller, and others in the administration have for immigrants, particularly non-white ones,” they write. “The strategy is clear: portray legal immigrants as a drain on the system, taking advantage of hard-working people like you.” [Share this story →]( Quote of the Day “Fiscal stimulus is like a drug with tolerance effects; to keep growth constant, deficits have to keep getting larger. Some combination of gathering foreign storm clouds, the end of growing fiscal stimulus and the delayed effect of tightening monetary policies may converge to slow or end the expansion.” – Larry Summers, former Treasury secretary and economic adviser to President Obama, in a [Washington Post op-ed]( arguing that “Trump hasn’t prepared us for the inevitable economic slowdown” What’s at Stake in November’s Elections: Tax Cuts, a Shutdown and Obamacare Repeal A lot can change over the next three months, but right now Democrats look likely to win control of the House of Representatives. They currently hold the lead in both [generic ballot polls]( and the [prediction market]( for control of the House, but Republicans have the edge in the Senate, pointing to a divided government after November 6. If Democrats win the House, legislative gridlock is the most likely outcome, says Andrew Hunter of Capital Economics. Gridlock raises the odds of a government shutdown, Hunter writes, with funding for President Trump’s border wall and the need to raise the debt ceiling in March serving as potential flash points. Democrat-led investigations into Trump and his inner circle could compound the overall dysfunction, ensuring that very little gets done as far as legislation is concerned. If Republicans keep control of both the House and the Senate, Hunter doubts that they can pass a second round of tax cuts, given the trillion-dollar annual deficits projected to start in 2020, driven in large part by the first set of cuts. Instead, Hunter expects a Republican-controlled Congress to turn to cutting federal spending, though without 60 seats in the Senate, those efforts may not amount to much. Bloomberg’s Jonathan Bernstein is skeptical about any efforts to cut spending, [writing]( instead that it’s “likely that spending will increase, with the logical (or at least politically feasible) compromise between increased spending on Republican priorities and Democratic priorities always being: both.” Bernstein notes that this scenario has significant fiscal implications: “Yes, that means the most likely policy outcome of continued Republican government would be extremely large federal budget deficits.” Obamacare is another likely target if Republicans hold the House, but Bernstein believes that repeal is unlikely. His logic is simple: Republicans couldn’t repeal the Affordable Care Act in the current Congress despite controlling all branches of government, so there’s no reason to think they can do so in the next one. Republicans have demonstrated that they don’t have a viable replacement plan, Bernstein says, and they may have concluded that attacking Obamacare is more valuable politically to them than actually voting to end it. But New York’s Jonathan Chait [thinks]( that Republicans might just give Obamacare repeal one more try if they remain in control of Congress. President Trump is still complaining about the Senate’s failure on a repeal vote last year, and a GOP victory in November could produce a House filled with more Trump loyalists, not less, as moderate Republicans in swing districts lose their seats to Democrats. Add that to the growing sense in the administration that Trump is immune from criticism from his base, no matter how harmful his actions may be to his supporters, and you have a recipe for another repeal attempt. “If Republicans can withstand the president calling Nazis ‘good people,’” Chait acidly writes, “why not take another crack at health care?” Chart of the Day The Tax Policy Center’s Elaine Maag [says]( that expanding the earned income tax credit (EITC) for workers without children at home would “substantially help reduce poverty.” Maag’s commentary Monday includes this chart, which provides a detailed look at how the EITC currently works for various households (blue lines), along with her proposed change (yellow line). News - [Medicaid Advocates Now Have Two More Studies to Back Them Up]( – Washington Post - [Retirement Incomes Will Become More Unequal, Study Finds]( – CNBC - [Once Its Greatest Foes, Doctors Are Embracing Single-Payer]( – Kaiser Health News - [Average Insurance Deductibles Keep Rising]( – Axios - [How Employers Are Shaking Up Pharmacy Benefits for 2019]( – CNBC - [Employers Are Finding New Ways to Cut Health Care Costs]( – CNN Money - [GM Cuts Different Type of Health-Care Deal]( – Wall Street Journal (paywall) - [Carl Icahn: Cigna-Express Scripts Merger Rivals ‘the Worst Acquisitions in Corporate History']( – Business Insider - [Banks After Tax Cuts: Loan Growth Slows and 3,200 Jobs Disappear]( – Bloomberg - [Republican Pitch on Robust Economy a Hard Sell in Regions Left Behind]( – Bloomberg - [Arkansas Governor Says Medicaid Savings Milestone Achieved Without Pain to Beneficiaries]( – Arkansas Times - [In Weary Post-Storm Puerto Rico, Medicaid Cutbacks Bode New Ills]( – Kaiser Health News - [5 Unanswered Questions About Space Force]( – Defense One Views and Analysis - [Democrats Seize on Cherry-Picked Claim That ‘Medicare-for-All’ Would Save $2 Trillion]( – Glenn Kessler, Washington Post - [Future of Health Insurance Is at Stake in the Midterms]( – Bloomberg Editorial Board - [Workplace Wellness Programs Don’t Work Well. Why Some Studies Show Otherwise.]( – Aaron E. Carroll, New York Times Upshot - [The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act Simplified the Tax Filing Process for Millions of Households]( – Erica York and Alex Muresianu, Tax Foundation - [Lowering the Capital Gains Tax Is Insulting to Everyday Americans]( – Richard Trumka and Morris Pearl, The Hill - [Companies Can Afford to Pay Workers More]( – Kendra Bozarth, Roosevelt Institute - [American Capitalism Can No Longer Afford to Let Workers Retire in Dignity]( – Eric Levitz, New York - [Our Massive Debt Crisis Poses Greatest Threat to Our Freedom]( – Shermichael Singleton, The Hill - [How America Stopped Prosecuting White-Collar Crime and Public Corruption, in Charts]( – Catherine Rampell, Washington Post Copyright © 2018 The Fiscal Times, All rights reserved. You are receiving this newsletter because you subscribed at our website, thefiscaltimes.com. Our mailing address is: The Fiscal Times 712 Fifth AvenueNew York, NY 10019 [Add us to your address book](//thefiscaltimes.us1.list-manage.com/vcard?u=40d2c5373681f5cd830b6d823&id=714147a9cf) If someone has forwarded this email to you, consider signing up for The Fiscal Times emails on our [website](. Want to change how you receive these emails? You can [update your preferences]( or [unsubscribe from this list](