Nancy Pelosi wasn't kidding when she said, "
We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it."
Buried deep within the the Democrat health care bill is a
secret payoff to immigrants that defies American traditions and was heretofore undisclosed.
Hidden within the 2,400-page DemCare legislation is a bullet to the head of the longstanding "public charge" doctrine. The doctrine states that "
no alien can be allowed into the United States if he is going to become a burden on the US taxpayer upon entry -- a public charge."
Congress and Bill Clinton strengthened the doctrine in 1996. They levied a five-year threshold on public benefits for aliens: put simply, new immigrants were unable to take advantage of the public dole until they'd supported themselves for at least five years. Reasonable enough?
Using every surreptitious means possible -- and discovered only recently -- the DemCare bill eradicates the "public charge" requirement. Why?
Simple: to build a permanent Democrat constituency dependent upon "free" health care. It means 10.8 million new immigrants on the public dole.
The "public charge" time-bomb was intentionally buried in the new legislation -- so deeply that it took weeks to discover it. As they unveil "immigration reform", President Obama and his drones in Congress will claim it costs Americans nothing. That immigrants will do "the jobs Americans won't". And other lies.
What will the bill cost taxpayers? The ObamaCare bill assumes a toll of
$15,000 a year for middle class families.
By granting amnesty for at least 10.8 million illegal immigrants, the Democrat health care bill will cost $162 billion a year -- or
$1.62 trillion, which the CBO never took into account.
Unless we fire the Democrat Party in November, I fear the magnificent American experiment may be at an end.
Buried deep within the the Democrat health care bill is a secret payoff to immigrants that defies American traditions and was heretofore undisclosed.
Hidden within the 2,400-page DemCare legislation is a bullet to the head of the longstanding "public charge" doctrine. The doctrine states that "no alien can be allowed into the United States if he is going to become a burden on the US taxpayer upon entry -- a public charge."
Congress and Bill Clinton strengthened the doctrine in 1996. They levied a five-year threshold on public benefits for aliens: put simply, new immigrants were unable to take advantage of the public dole until they'd supported themselves for at least five years. Reasonable enough?
Using every surreptitious means possible -- and discovered only recently -- the DemCare bill eradicates the "public charge" requirement. Why?
Simple: to build a permanent Democrat constituency dependent upon "free" health care. It means 10.8 million new immigrants on the public dole.
The "public charge" time-bomb was intentionally buried in the new legislation -- so deeply that it took weeks to discover it. As they unveil "immigration reform", President Obama and his drones in Congress will claim it costs Americans nothing. That immigrants will do "the jobs Americans won't". And other lies.
What will the bill cost taxpayers? The ObamaCare bill assumes a toll of $15,000 a year for middle class families.
By granting amnesty for at least 10.8 million illegal immigrants, the Democrat health care bill will cost $162 billion a year -- or $1.62 trillion, which the CBO never took into account.
Unless we fire the Democrat Party in November, I fear the magnificent American experiment may be at an end.
The four boxes of freedom.
ReplyDelete-The Soap Box.
-The Ballot Box.
-The Jury Box.
-The Ammo Box.
Unless we fire the Democrat Party in November, I fear the magnificent American experiment may be at an end.
The Corruptocrats are going to try to steal the election in November. They stand a very good chance of doing so because they "own" the election mechanisms in many states-see Ohio, Missouri (massive ACORN voter fraud in 2008), Washington state (2004 Governor election), New York (the 2009 special election for New York's 23rd congressional district) and Minnesota (2008 Senate election) for some recent examples of the kinds of hijinx you can expect to see in November.
They would have tried to steal the Massachusetts Senate election but the turnout was so overwhelming for Scott Brown that there was no way they could do it without it being very obvious. I told my sister to watch the results that night-if Brown did not get at least 100,000 votes more then Coakley then the Corruptocrat party machine would pull a "Franken" and keep "recounting the votes" until they achieved their desired results. If he won by over 100,000 votes there is no way they could do it without it being obvious to everyone that they were stealing the election.
That's too much. And I think they cannot produce bomb that amount too big.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, the NYPost article didn't provide the source of the allegation within the bill. Doug, would you be able to dig that up?
ReplyDeleteThis "new" revelation isn't actually new. "Public Charge" statutes were already gutted in 1999 by the Clinton administration (See 1999 Federal Register page 28693). At that time, the INS excluded participation in the following welfare programs as cause for deportation:
ReplyDelete• Medicaid and other health insurance and health services (including public assistance for immunizations and for testing and treatment of symptoms of communicable diseases, use of health clinics, short-term rehabilitation services, prenatal care, and emergency medical services) other than support for long-term institutional care
• Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP)
• Nutrition programs, including Food Stamps, the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC), the National School Lunch and School Breakfast Program, and other supplementary and emergency food assistance programs
• Housing benefits
• Child care services
• Energy assistance, such as the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP)
• Emergency disaster relief
• Foster care and adoption assistance
• Educational assistance (such as attending public school), including benefits under the Head Start Act and aid for elementary, secondary, or higher education
• Job training programs
• In-kind, community-based programs, services, or assistance (such as soup kitchens, crisis counseling and intervention, and short-term shelter)
• Non-cash benefits under TANF such as subsidized child care or transit subsidies
• Cash payments that have been earned, such as Title II Social Security benefits, government pensions, and veterans' benefits, among other forms of earned benefits, do not support a public charge determination
• Unemployment compensation is also not considered for public charge purposes
Source: U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service
Please provide the source... or where to find it in the bill. Thanks
ReplyDeleteThe original article was from The New York Post here.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h3590/text?version=enr&nid=t0:enr:1902
‘(c) Definition and Rules Relating to Applicable Taxpayers, Coverage Months, and Qualified Health Plan- For purposes of this section--CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(1) APPLICABLE TAXPAYER-CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(A) IN GENERAL- The term ‘applicable taxpayer’ means, with respect to any taxable year, a taxpayer whose household income for the taxable year exceeds 100 percent but does not exceed 400 percent of an amount equal to the poverty line for a family of the size involved.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(B) SPECIAL RULE FOR CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS LAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES- If--CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(i) a taxpayer has a household income which is not greater than 100 percent of an amount equal to the poverty line for a family of the size involved, andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(ii) the taxpayer is an alien lawfully present in the United States, but is not eligible for the medicaid program under title XIX of the Social Security Act by reason of such alien status,CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
the taxpayer shall, for purposes of the credit under this section, be treated as an applicable taxpayer with a household income which is equal to 100 percent of the poverty line for a family of the size involved.
Agree with Scott - we need to see the pdf.
ReplyDelete