Sunteți pe pagina 1din 2

December 10 th , 2018

December 10 t h , 2018 Ms. Samantha Deshommes Chief, Regulatory Coordination Division, Office of Policy
December 10 t h , 2018 Ms. Samantha Deshommes Chief, Regulatory Coordination Division, Office of Policy

Ms. Samantha Deshommes Chief, Regulatory Coordination Division, Office of Policy and Strategy

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Department of Homeland Security 20 Massachusetts Avenue NW Washington, D.C. 20529-2140

DHS Docket No. USCIS-2010-0012

Dear Ms. Deshommes:

We write regarding the proposed revision to the “public charge” rule, which governs consideration of whether immigrants seeking to enter the country or adjust status may unduly rely on taxpayer-funded benefits. We believe this proposed revision would strain and deprive the country of future contributions from immigrants, causing the opposite effect of the fiscal benefits it proposes to accomplish, and therefore should be rejected.

Its overall effect would be to reduce legal immigration to the country—in particular the entry and status change of immigrants who would likely contribute substantially to their communities and the nation— thereby having precisely the opposite effect of what is intended. For these reasons, this rule should be rejected.

Under current law and longstanding practice, immigrants to the United States should be able to provide for themselves, or—in times of need—rely on the legal sponsors who have committed to support them. We welcome the opportunity to work with anyone to improve how these policies are administered. It would be a serious mistake however, to revise the public charge rule in such a way that its effect is to deprive our nation of the very talented and hard-working people we seek to welcome and who history shows contribute so much to our success. 1

Today, thanks, in part, to policies enacted under this administration, unemployment has reached historic lows. Immigrants are filling important jobs at a time when employers report being unable to find employees to fill millions of open positions. At the same time, businesses founded by immigrants and their children employ millions of Americans and their innovations continue to improve our lives. Their contributions on countless fronts, including culturally and economically, add much to our

1 https://www.forbes.com/sites/stuartanderson/2018/10/01/how-will-the-public-charge-rule-harm-employers-and-

immigrants/#45306e794995

country. While we should embrace proposals to improve our immigration system, it would do serious
country. While we should embrace proposals to improve our immigration system, it would do serious

country. While we should embrace proposals to improve our immigration system, it would do serious harm to our country and economy to block the entry of people whom we rely on today, as well as people who will create so much growth and rich opportunity in the future.

Under U.S. law, any noncitizen judged “likely at any time to become a public charge” is to be denied admission. That determination has until recently been made based on whether a given applicant is expected to be “primarily dependent” on taxpayer-funded benefits.

The proposed regulation, however, would make this determination a more subjective assessment made on an ad hoc, case-by-case basis based on newly, undefined criteria. It also fails to account for future contributions, a particularly consequential flaw to a rule that seeks to determine if an immigrant’s presence will be a net cost or contribution to the country. 2 Instead of relying on data accumulated over time to establish transparent standards that will apply to all, this rule would lead to a guessing game in which some applicants are accepted and others denied—even though their applications may be essentially identical. The new rule’s increase in uncertainty could have substantial impact on several industries across the economy 3 —preventing admission of immigrants who would contribute substantially to our nation.

We are concerned that the overall effect of this rule will be to dramatically deny the “patriotic and liberty-loving” people from around the world—of whom President Lincoln famously spoke—an opportunity to contribute to our country while they build a better future. Moreover, American employers, employees, and communities will be denied the opportunity to retain, embrace and welcome the individuals whose presence they are counting on. 3

If we wish to enhance the benefits that immigration delivers to our country, our policies should encourage entry of immigrants who will contribute the most over the course of their lives—rather than just creating obstacles to new immigrants. Any new standards should be clear and consistent—and should rely on data and lessons learned from our nation’s successful history with immigrants over decades.

We stand ready to work with anyone to improve our immigration system and ensure it is focused on promoting opportunities for individuals to participate fully and contribute to our great nation.

Regards,

Daniel Garza President, The LIBRE Initiative

2 https://www.cato.org/blog/new-rule-deny-status-immigrants-95-self-sufficient

3 https://www.politico.com/story/2018/10/16/immigration-trump-green-card-908820