It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Illegal immigrants are not eligible for means tested welfare programs for themselves. They can collect certain benefits for their American born children (WIC, food stamps, free school lunches, Medicaid).
Like our prior analysis, the major welfare programs examined in this report are Supplemental Security Income (SSI), Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF), the Women, Infants, and Children food program (WIC), free or subsidized school lunch, food stamps (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, SNAP), Medicaid, and public housing and rent subsidies.3
Immigrant Eligibility for Welfare.
The appendix to the companion report includes a long discussion of the regulations and laws covering immigrant welfare eligibility. As it makes clear, the 1996 welfare reform changes and other laws are designed to limit immigrant reliance on welfare programs — particularly legal immigrants, since illegal immigrants have been barred from welfare for a long time. These policies include the long-standing "public charge" doctrine that bars entry of immigrants likely to need welfare and the deportation of those who become dependent on it, a five-year bar on most new legal immigrants accessing welfare, and a "deeming" requirement that sponsors' income be considered before welfare can be received.
Equally important, immigrants, including those illegally in the country, can receive welfare on behalf of their U.S.-born children. As a result, both our prior report and this one show that immigrant households make extensive use of the nation's welfare system, often at significantly higher rates than native households.
originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: gator2001
China is communist. This is America . We are not.
In the early 2000s, Arizona attorney general Terry Goddard and other state authorities suspected Mexican crime syndicates were moving money through Western Union wire transfers, and sought to seize money in Western Union accounts. The figures were mind-boggling, according to the prosecutors’ testimony: $500 million a year in Western Union payments from Arizona, and $2.5 billion a year in payments for people-smuggling overall. But Colorado-based Western Union contended a state attorney general didn’t have the authority to review wire transfers from other U.S. states directly to Mexico, arguing that it violated the privacy of their customers and overstepped limits on the state’s search-and-seizure authority. State prosecutors countered that the wire transfers constituted payment for crimes committed inside Arizona. In 2009, the Arizona Supreme Court agreed that Goddard had exceeded his authority when he sought records of transfers exceeding $500 from 29 other U.S. states to Sonora, the Mexican state directly south of Arizona. But the following year, the company reached a settlement with the state, granting investigators in Arizona, California, Texas, and New Mexico “unprecedented” access to records of electronic payments to Mexico. Trump’s pledge to ‘impound’ remittance payments implies seizure, an act that would face a high legal bar to clear. Note that Goddard and like-minded prosecutors sought access to accounts being used by cartels and migrant-smugglers, not garden-variety illegal immigrants sending money home to their families Read more at: www.nationalreview.com...
originally posted by: o0oTOPCATo0o
a reply to: Krazysh0t
If you noticed in the last post, I compared this to getting ID'd for smokes. Something I have no problem with.
Also, the "others" you speak of may be here illegally.
I ship things to mexico quite a bit at my job. There are numerous forms to be filled out for taxation purposes and material tracking purposes. My company has to provide a tax ID number among other identifiers.
I don't feel like asking the same for money transfers is anything too terrible.