Posted on 09/15/2009 11:47:08 PM PDT by rmlew
Like virtually every issue that faces the nation, our healthcare problem is greatly exacerbated by mass immigration—both legal and illegal. A total of 43% of non-citizens lack health insurance, compared to just 12.7% of native-born Americans. These uninsured immigrants impose huge strains on our healthcare system that helped create the crisis we currently face.
Plenty of analysts and commentators have exposed how illegal aliens will receive healthcare under Obamacare. They point out that while the bill claims to prohibit illegal aliens from receiving benefits, the Democrats repeatedly blocked Amendments that would screen for legal status. Steve Camorata of the non-partisan Center for Immigration Studies recently estimated that 6.6 million illegal aliens will be eligible for public healthcare.
This is an outrage for hardworking American Citizens, but I’d like to focus on two other important but largely ignored aspects of our immigration crisis that will cost taxpayers billions of dollars if Obama’s healthcare boondoggle is passed.
The first is birthright citizenship. The 14th Amendment of the Constitution states,
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.
The Amendment was passed for the sole purpose of granting freed slaves and their children citizenship. Senator Jacob Merritt Howard of Michigan who introduced the Amendment stated,
This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States.
But the obvious intent, as well as the “subject to jurisdiction thereof” clause, is ignored by federal policy that gives children of illegal aliens born in the United States automatic citizenship.
What does this have to do with the healthcare debate? Under the plan right now, only one family member needs to be eligible for government healthcare, then the whole family can get free healthcare.
The Congressional Research Service acknowledged,
There could be instances where some family members would meet the definition of an eligible individual for purposes of the credit, while other family members would not… H.R. 3200 does not expressly address how such a situation would be treated. Therefore, it appears that the Health Choices Commissioner would be responsible for determining how the credits would be administered in the case of mixed-status families.”
This means that if a family of illegal aliens sneaks into the country and then they have one child after they come in, the US Citizen “anchor baby” could make the entire family eligible for tax funded healthcare. And I don’t need to tell you how Obama’s handpicked “Health Czar” would come down on the issue.
Another problem that makes the healthcare bill problematic is our policy of legal immigration. Annually, America accepts approximately one million legal immigrants in addition to the flood of illegal aliens. Most of these immigrants come through the process of chain migration, whereby legal immigrants and US Citizens sponsor family members. The process spirals out of control where eventually everyone’s cousin is eligible, regardless of skills or what they contribute to this country.
Steve Camarota analyzed the effect of all immigrants, both legal and illegal, as well as their US Born children on health insurance. Camarota found that this group comprises up to one third of all the uninsured in America. Compared to the native born population, they are twice as likely to be uninsured, and twice as likely to be on Medicaid.
In an attempt to partially alleviate the burden chain migration places on social services, the 1996 Welfare Reform Act made some requirements that the sponsors of immigrants be financially responsible for the immigrants. Indeed most welfare programs have some limitations on non-citizens. But under HR 3200, new immigrants who are supposed to be supported by a sponsor can get tax funded healthcare. They can even sponsor more immigrants!
Writing at the immigration website VDARE.com, former Hudson Institute economist Ed Rubenstein estimates that legal immigrants and their children will be responsible for 78% of all increased healthcare costs by 2050 totaling 1.2 trillion dollars.
Unlike illegal aliens, anchor babies and legal immigrants did not break any laws. We should not demonize them, but we should not ignore the huge fiscal burden they impose on our already stretched economy.
Fixing our broken healthcare system is not easy, but making some basic changes to our immigration policy is. Securing our borders, enforcing our laws, ending birthright citizenship and chain migration, and reducing our levels of legal immigration; would do much more to lower healthcare costs than any government program.
Before America embarks on healthcare reform, we should either fix these problems in our immigration system, or at least put adequate safeguards to prevent immigrants from receiving even more free benefits at the expense of the US taxpayer.
ping
Baucus, on a local station (Face the State, Montana’s News Station, KXLF), was asked about this and he said that it was false that illegals will be included.
WHY? Because there was no provision for FUNDING!
His comment was at the end of a link which is now gone (it was a 30 minute video that I couldn’t open due to dial up/system). He finished with comments to the audience to not get their information from Fox or Limbaugh.
The illegal immigrant issue needs to be fixed on multiple levels. A huge step would be to fix the amendment and remove the automatic citizenship. It has long outlived its purpose and now provides fodder for lawyers and angst-ridden liberals who want to soothe their consciences by giving away someone else's money.
The federal government needs to step up to the plate and do its duty to America. A large part of the health care funding issue could be easily solved. American hospitals, who operate closely enough to the break-even line as it is, have to pass the cost of treating illegal immigrants on to those who use the facilities above the board.
Treatment of illegal aliens should be addressed as a foreign policy issue. That would take the pressure off of the hospitals, and place it in the jurisdiction of the federal government.
In addressing it as a foreign policy issue, the federal government should:
1. Enact a law which states that any un-insured foreign national (legal or otherwise) seeking treatment would only receive emergency treatment sufficient to enable them to be transported to their country of origin. Before being transported, the State Department should make every effort possible to contact their next-of-kin to arrange treatment on the receiving end.
2. As soon as practicable upon being stabilized for transportation, the un-insured foreign national patient would be transported to the nearest admitting hospital of that country from which they came.
3. If there was no admitting hospital, or no next-of-kin, then the transported foreign national would be turned over to the emergency room of the nearest hospital of the country of origin.
4. Any country who opposed such process would be free to sign a treaty in which they accepted financial responsibility for any treatment provided to their citizens while in the U.S., legal or otherwise.
That way hospitals wouldn't face open-ended treatment requirements, and the U.S. taxpayers wouldn't have to write blank checks for treating illegal immigrants.
Oh, and lawyers who wanted to enrich themselves at taxpayer expense by taking on this type of case would have to go find another ambulance to chase.
Good fences make good neighbors.
And if the sick foreign national is married to an American?
I am an American married to a foreigner who is here legally because of our marriage, and neither of us are eligible for any kind of gov’t assistance (I’m not complaining, just reporting). But an illegal alien with no ties to this country is entitled to food stamps, education, free medical, etc, etc, etc.
Does this make any sense?
Good question -- I guess that would have to be specifically addressed, maybe something to the effect that a foreign national spouse would have been sponsored into the country by a resident citizen who has accepted financial responsibility for him/her (foreign national spouses still have to go through the immigration process to live in the U.S.).
If unable to meet such responsibilities, then the foreign national spouse would be subject to the provisions I described.
The point of this is to keep foreign nationals off the taxpayers' dime. There are currently many ways for other people to give taxpayers' money to foreign countries. I'd like to see a few of them shut down.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.