Rachel Browning’s Legal Blog

While the debate over the economic stimulus package has made its way to the Senate, and the public has begun to wonder if any of President Obama’s other cabinet appointees have also had trouble remembering to pay their taxes, one major piece of legislation did manage to make it to the President’s desk for signature and approval.  Earlier this week, the President approved the reauthorization and expansion of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), a federal government program that gives matching funds to states to provide health insurance to cover uninsured children in families with incomes that are too high to qualify for Medicaid, but also too low to afford private health insurance.  The bill will expand the coverage of the program to include approximately 4 million more children, including some legal immigrants.

The “Legal Immigrant Children’s Health Improvement Act” (ICHIA) is part of the SCHIP legislation and authorizes states to waive the current five-year waiting period required of legal permanent residents to establish eligibility for certain benefits.  Contrary to the myth that immigrants take of our federal and state resources without contributing to them, legal permanent residents must pay into the social security and Medicare/Medicaid system for a period of five years before being eligible for any benefits.  This additional provision of SCHIP will allow legal immigrant children access to benefits without the previous five-year waiting period.  The bill sounds benign enough to me, but I noticed it didn’t take long for CNN’s Lou Dobbs, the Heritage Foundation, the Federation for American Immigration Reform (the group not-at-all-ironically known as FAIR), and other anti-immigrant organizations  to proclaim that “4 million illegal immigrants” could be covered by the bill at YOU the “taxpayer’s,” expense.  For the moment, I will set aside the fact that rhetoric like this innacurate, inflammatory, and does nothing to encourage a substantive and dignified debate of the issue.  I don’t care where you stand on comprehensive immigration reform or enhanced border security; can’t we at least agree that a child should be entitled to health care when he or she needs it?  And if we can agree on the basic premise that a child’s health is worth protecting, are we really ready to limit that protection – that basic right – to children born in the U.S. while denying it to others because they were born somewhere else?   Of course, I am assuming that we agree that health care is in fact a “right” and not a “benefit.”  I could be out on a limb here, but I think of it as a right.

President Obama has long advocated for ICHIA to become part of the SCHIP legislation, and so I am hopeful that its inclusion in the final bill signals a potential shift in the direction of the debate over immigration.  I’m not alone in this hope.  In a press release commending Congress for its passage of the bill, AILA representative George Tzamaras remarked:

When President Obama…signs the legislation, it will be a significant victory for all children.  And it will mark a significant change in the direction of the immigration debate.  Anti-immigrant organizations have fought tooth and nail to prevent this humane and eminently sensible measure from becoming law.  Those groups should see the writing on the wall.  ICHIA is the first pro-immigrant measure to go to this President’s desk, but it will not be the last.  This Congress and this Administration have committed to reforming our immigration system, restoring the rule of law, and treating all people in this country with respect.  AILA welcomes that overdue commitment and looks forward to working with Congress to solve the many challenges facing our immigration system.

            There are many challenges remaining indeed.  But in this, the promised era of reform, I am cautiously optimistic that our leaders can reach a consensus, and that lasting change can be accomplished.

Please contact me with any comments or questions you may have on this, or other immigration-related issues.