Immigrants’ sponsors to be on hook for ‘every dollar’ if new arrivals end up on dole, new Trump appointee warns
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Sponsors of legal immigrants to the United States received word Friday that they’ll be on the hook “for every dollar” if those immigrants end up receiving welfare funds or other public support instead of earning a living and paying taxes.
The message came Ken Cuccinelli, a former Virginia state attorney general who last week became acting director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) following his appointment by President Trump .
“If the sponsored immigrant receives any federal means-tested public benefits, the sponsor will be expected to reimburse the benefits-granting agency for every dollar of benefits received by the immigrant,” Cuccinelli wrote in a USCIS memo.
“If the sponsored immigrant receives any federal means-tested public benefits, the sponsor will be expected to reimburse the benefits-granting agency for every dollar of benefits received by the immigrant.” — Ken Cuccinelli, acting director, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
'Enforceable contract'
In addition, the same message instructed agents who work for USCIS to remind applicants and sponsors that “the Affidavit of Support is a legal and enforceable contract between the sponsor and the federal government.”
According to Cuccinelli, all federal agencies dealing with immigration issues will be working to update or initiate procedures and regulations to make sure that immigrants who are ineligible for public benefits do not receive them, in accordance with a May 23 directive from the president.
“The President has made it a priority to ensure that every individual who seeks to come to the United States is self-sufficient, temporarily or permanently,” Cuccinelli wrote . “The principle of self-sufficiency has been enshrined in our immigration laws since the 1800s, and we as an agency must ensure that immigrants who become part of this great country abide by this principle.”
“The President has made it a priority to ensure that every individual who seeks to come to the United States is self-sufficient, temporarily or permanently.” — Ken Cuccinelli, acting director, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
Cuccinelli took over at USCIS last Monday, coming to the job with a reputation as a hardliner on immigration issues. For example, he has been an advocate for denying citizenship to American-born children of parents living in the U.S. illegally and for limiting in-state tuition at public universities to citizens or legal residents.
He replaced Lee Francis Cissna, who reportedly had lost President Trump’s confidence.
Critical of McConnell, others in GOP
But Trump likely named Cuccinelli an acting director because his chances of winning Senate confirmation were said to be slim, Roll Call reported .
The outspoken Cuccinelli, as president of the Senate Conservatives Fund, a political action committee that has opposed many incumbent Republicans, has been critical of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and others in the GOP.
“Mitch McConnell has filled the Senate with people like Lisa Murkowski, John McCain, Shelley Moore Capito, Lamar Alexander and Dean Heller who all promised the voters they would repeal Obamacare, but when the time came to do it they refused,” Cuccinelli wrote in an August 2017 fundraising memo, according to Roll Call. “Instead of admitting his mistake, McConnell is blaming the President for having ‘excessive expectations’ even though he was the one who set those expectations with years of empty promises!”
Trump’s appointment of Cuccinelli came as the president is dealing with a growing crisis as tens of thousands of Central American migrants cross the U.S.-Mexico border each month, overwhelming the system, and he has struggled to deliver on his signature issue of reduced immigration and tighter border security.
Fox News’ Andrew O’Reilly and the Associated Press contributed to this report.
Article is LOCKED by author/seeder
Tags
Who is online
87 visitors
Ken Cuccinelli is so mean! Demanding that immigrants be self-sufficient! What an idea!
Seems the vast majority of immigrants come here to find work and be self sufficient. Only racists think differently.
When was the last time you spent weeks on end breaking your back picking melons?
You must be from a very dead-end place to actually believe that everyone is entitled to live off the teat of other's work.
Immigration law REQUIRES that aliens be self-sufficient. Are you now advocating to further violate those laws?
What does race have to do with legal immigration?
Used to supervise a family of Guatemalans on a ranch/farm operation where I was foreman. Hard workers, quick learners and invariably pleasant. Slipped the father a pack of Marlboros every morning so he wouldn't have to smoke that rank crap he was rolling. The mother and daughters kept me fed with very tasty ethnic food. Trained the son in the martial arts. The daughter and my girlfriend became best of friends. Good folk.
Did I forget to mention that they were illegal aliens at the time? Had they been arrested and deported they would have been killed for their pro democracy leanings. They are now productive US citizens and probably know more about the inner workings of government than most natural born Americans.
Healthy, no criminal record, marketable skills.
Too bad we didn't have those rules back in the 17, 18, 19 and 20th century.
[Deleted]
Then what he is suggesting, a return to our actual laws on the books would have zero impact on the people you knew or described earlier. Even if 90% of immigrants are hard working and independent and I believe it is close to that number, it’s still right to go after the other 10% and their sponsors as Cuccinelli suggested.
We have had those rules for centuries. Most educated people are aware of this.
It seems that the people cjcold described were illegal aliens and not legal immigrants. Many people choose to ignore that there is a difference between illegal and legal.
As you said, we've had immigration laws for many decades. My mother legally emigrated to the US in the 1940s. The FBI "visited" her sponsors as well as their neighbors even after she'd been here for a couple of years and had earned her green card.
Both of my maternal grandparents arrived here separately around 1920 after World War One. They came from a part of Austria that became a part of Italy after the war. They met almost a decade later at an Italian club in San Francisco. So, while I’m opposed to illegal immigration, I strongly support legal immigration and the current laws regarding them. Trump is right in seeking immigration from people who help us most.
Yet nothing in USCIS policy or Trump's EO changes the FACT that there is no requirement that a sponsored immigrant meet a skill standard.
Your argument would have some substance if the USA existed in the 17th century and for the first 3/4 of the 18th century, but it didn't (think Revolutionary War, US Constitution ratification, etc). It would also have some substance if there had been federal immigration laws prior to the 1880s (that's the 19th century, btw).
We didn't need any 'illegal riff-raff' when the first Europeans set foot in this country either, but, we welcomed them in friendship anyway.
Who is "we"? To what geographical land mass (country) do you refer? In what's now known as North America, The United States of America and the US Constitution didn't exist in the 14th century through almost all of the 18th century.
We don't need no more illegal riffraff.
[Deleted]
"riffraff" is in the eye of the beholder.
[Deleted]
I thought you were one of those 'our rights are given by the creator' kinda girls.
The 'we' refers to the Native American inhabitants of North America. The rest of your questions should be answered with that one.
No one has the right to immigrate to this or any other country. Blows your comment out of the water doesn't it?
So no one had rights before the constitution?
Sure you do
You also forgot to mention whether of not they followed the LEGAL process and became U.S. citizens - or are they still in this country Illegally?
Only if you take it out of context, which you've decided to do.
In reply to a comment about 'illegal riff raff' the reply was that the Constitution didn't exist until the end of the 18th century.
I presume that the mistaken posit was that the 'riff raff' couldn't be illegal if the Constitution didn't exist yet.
Yet conservatives and fundamentalists are always claiming that we are endowed by 'our creator' with inalienable rights which would mean that when the Constitution became law is IRRELEVANT since I presume even YOU will acknowledge that 'our creator' predated the signing of the Constitution.
Your arguement still does not hold water because there is no inherent Right to immigrate..
So you're not a believer in the creator thingy. Got ya.
BTFW, where did I say anything about 'inherent right to immigrate'?
We are talking about 'illegal riff raff' coming in before the 18th century. Do try to keep up.
I think the subject is the current hoards of "riff-raff" bringing sick children to the border trying to get the jump on people who really needs asylum
Illegal is illegal now or before the18th Century. In any case neither they nor anyone else has a right to immigrate here riff raff or not. Not in the 18Th Century nor now
Where did Raven Wing state or imply that?
I am sure Jesus would have told them to fuck off as well. /s
Then you're not following the thread, are you?
BTFW, the seed isn't about asylum seekers.
There was no such thing as 'illegal immigration' before the 18th century. The first exclusionary law was passed in 1882.
They still didn't have a God given right to come here.
Actually, some of my ancestors came here by writ of the King [Royal Charter], who at least thought he was a god...
But wasn't which still does not negate anything I have said on this seed
Which king claimed he was a god?
WTF is it with the conservative here at NT lately?
Did someone have a clearance sale on 'strawmen'?
Neanderthal man didn't need the 'illegal riff-raff' when the first Cro-magnon man set foot in Europe either.
Which King thought he was a god?
We are a pleasant and happy group of patriotic Americans who proudly and strongly defend our beliefs and values from all opposition come what may.
So your idea of proudly and strongly defending your beliefs and values is to post strawman fallacies?
Remember to say that when the court's throw it out
awesome... should have been done yrs ago. but trump was not president then.
with an exception for reagan, the past presidents, who were all globalists, either left or right, never would have done that.
cheers
At what point do isolationists realize that we now live in a global society?
at what point do globalists realize in 2016 we clearly told them to fuk off?
Actually 3 million more voters wanted Hillary for president. How is that a "fuk off"?
I suppose that a globalist is the opposite of being an isolationist. It's a big world we live in.
Too bad for her and too bad for you that it is not the illegal votes from California didn't count in the electoral college. Trump was winning the popular vote also until CA chimed in.
besides the globalists. in 2016 we told all three million of them along with the entire left to fuk off as well.
I believe that was made clear enough by jan 2017 nothing has changed.
we took our country back... we did not ask anyone for permission.
Didn't work for you then and never will. The right is killing themselves with racism and hate
Trumps own admin proved that wasn't true. Just another of trumps lies.
They still didn't mean anything In terms of winning the election
I agree with this. immigrant sponsors need to be fiscally responsible for the people they sponsor.
I'm not even fiscally responsible for myself on occasion.
then you probably should not sponsor immigrants.
My parents sponsored many Rotary Club exchange students over the years. It was very cool getting to know the best and brightest from all over the world.
They've always had to be, Trump hasn't changed anything. He just made a proclamation that doesn't change the law. It doesn't even change Agency regulations. It's basically the 'boss' telling his AGENCY heads to do their jobs. SHOULD have been done on day one. But of course, that wouldn't make him look like a hard ass or make a splash.
I wonder if Trump will release the reports that he mandated. I'll make popcorn before I read them if he does.
I was an illegal alien in australia... stayed too long.
but I never cost them a penny, except for the cops salary who escorted me to the airport.
he said : do I have to stand here and watch you board that plane?
I said: yes sir.
he smiled back at me and then we hung out and talked until they borded the plane...
he asked where I had been... on a walkabout I replied.
was good fun
I just realized... after more than 20yrs gone by...
I never returned that rental car because the cop put me in his.
that car is probably still sitting outside that bank... LOL
I own a opal mine in Australia. Never been there. Seems that everything in Australia wants to kill you.
I thought about going there a few times but they wouldn't let me bring my guns.
word.
between stone fish and +30ft waves... I'm not exactly sure how I made it out alive.
cheers
The stories of lethal spiders and snakes have kept me away from my claim in the outback. Thankfully the abo's who work it don't steal more than they are worth. Actually tend to show a profit most years.
Fire opals are amazingly beautiful! One can get lost staring at them.
The Fire Opal is my birthstone. And yes, they are not only beautiful, but, inspirational as well. I was given a Fire Opal ring by my parents for my 16th birthday. It was surrounded by Amethysts in a combination of gold and silver setting.
I still have it, and wear it occasionally.
So Trump, Mr. Law and Order, just got around to SAYING that he is requiring that Executive Agencies enforce the law.
Hilarious...
“If the sponsored immigrant receives any federal means-tested public benefits, the sponsor will be expected to reimburse the benefits-granting agency for every dollar of benefits received by the immigrant,” Cuccinelli wrote in a USCIS memo.
How about we write it like this:
“If the child receives any federal means-tested public benefits, the parent will be expected to reimburse the benefits-granting agency for every dollar of benefits received by the child,”
Hate for humanity abounds around the right
In all honesty, that is how it works in my household. Actually, neither are on the dole, I foot the bill until they are able to legally have a job here. Highly skilled, highly educated professionals. Easily employed, once all the legalities are straight.
I am glad they finally found a job for Ken Cuccinell. This might be something he can do
The principle of self-sufficiency
If the above is a principal that applies to those coming to the us, it must also be a principal which applies to those already living in the us. This being true, how is it that parents, or grandparents or foster parents are not responsible for the self-sufficiency of their offspring? Hmm? Please tell me why then all government programs have not been rolled back to pre-1933 levels. Do you, Vic Eldred, really believe that all Americans are self sufficient? Do you really believe there are no homeless veterans? Do you really believe there are no people whose lives have been destroyed because of corporate decisions?