CMF’s Public Policy Committee reviewed proposed changes to the public charge rule at their meeting last week, as the federal government is accepting feedback on the potential changes through December 10. Funders are encouraged to study the issue and submit feedback before the December deadline.

Since 1999, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has followed the guidelines that if an applicant for a green card or VISA has the likelihood of “becoming primarily dependent on the government for subsistence” for welfare, Supplementary Security Income (SSI) or assistance for long-term care - meaning that they are likely to become a public charge – it is grounds to be denied citizenship.

The proposed changes would expand the reach of how public charge is defined. Instead of assessing whether an individual may become “primarily dependent,” DHS would examine 15 factors to determine if the person may ever be considered financially vulnerable and need to access any programs. The list of programs would be expanded to include: SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program); Section 8 Housing Voucher Program; Section 8 Rental Assistance; and certain aspects of the Medicaid and Medicare Part D low-income subsidy program.

According to Grantmakers Concerned with Immigrants and Refugees (GCIR), if this same “test” were applied to Americans, up to one out of every three would fail the test.

GCIR shared in a statement, “If enacted, it would put millions of working-class immigrant families already here at greater risk of hunger, poverty, homelessness and other hardships—and destabilize communities across the country.” GCIR suggests that the fear of immigration consequences that has already led many immigrants to dis-enroll themselves and their children from programs for which they qualify would be followed by millions more people disenrolling if the new rules were enacted, “whether or not the change actually applies to them.”

Forbes reports that changes to the public charge rule “could have a dramatic impact on immigrants, temporary visa holders and U.S. employers.”

“A U.S. employer is going to find it more difficult and much less predictable to extend the status of a highly skilled worker on an H-1B visa or to help switch a key recruit from a student visa to an H-1B,” Doug Rand, former assistant director for entrepreneurship at the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy told Forbes. “Unless the employer is paying the worker more than that newly made-up threshold – 250 percent of the poverty line – they might not be able to renew their work visa and stay in the United States.”

DHS is accepting public comment on the proposed rule changes until December 10. GCIR’s goal is to secure a minimum of 100 foundation submissions, noting that such comments do not constitute lobbying.

GCIR has identified four additional ways that funders against this proposal can take action:

• Deploy support for urgent advocacy, organizing and litigation efforts.

• Encourage grantees and broader networks to voice their concerns via public comments. The Protecting Immigrant Families campaign has a goal of 100,000 unique comments.

• Declare your institution’s objection to the rule in the public sphere by issuing statements, penning op-eds or blogposts and engaging through social media.

• Urge philanthropic colleagues, civic and faith leaders, the private sector and other stakeholders to act.

Want more?

Learn more about the proposal via the Federal Register.

Read the entire GCIR Statement.