Thread: Facing $1 billion deficit, Arizona sharply limits welfare

Facing $1 billion deficit, Arizona sharply limits welfare

RYAN VAN VELZER 3 hours ago

• 

PHOENIX (AP) — Facing a $1 billion budget deficit, Arizona's Republican-led Legislature has reduced the lifetime limit for welfare recipients to the shortest window in the nation.

Low-income families on welfare will now have their benefits cut off after just 12 months.

As a result, the Arizona Department of Economic Security will drop at least 1,600 families — including more than 2,700 children — from the state's federally funded welfare program on July 1, 2016.

The cuts of at least $4 million reflect a prevailing mood among the lawmakers in control in Arizona that welfare, Medicaid and other public assistance programs are crutches that keep the poor from getting back on their feet and achieving their potential.

"I tell my kids all the time that the decisions we make have rewards or consequences, and if I don't ever let them face those consequences, they can't get back on the path to rewards," Republican Sen. Kelli Ward, R-Lake Havasu City, said during debate on the budget. "As a society, we are encouraging people at times to make poor decisions and then we reward them."

Cutting off these benefits after just one year isn't fair, said Jessica Lopez, 23, who gave birth to her son while living in a domestic violence shelter and has struggled to hold onto jobs because she has dyslexia and didn't finish high school.
View gallery

Gov. Doug Ducey speaks at a state memorial service for former Arizona Gov. Raul Castro Saturday, May …

"We're all human," said Lopez, who got $133 per month for about a year until she qualified for a larger federal disability check.

"Everybody has problems. Everybody is different. When people ask for help, we should be able to get it without having to be looked at wrong."

Most states impose a five-year limit on welfare benefits. Thirteen states limit it to two years or less, and Texas has a tiered time limit that can be as little as 12 months but allows children to continue to receive funding even after the parents have been cut, welfare policy analyst Liz Schott said.

Long-term welfare recipients are often the most vulnerable, suffering from mental and physical disabilities, poor job histories and little education, she said. But without welfare, they'll likely show up in other ways that will cost taxpayers, from emergency rooms to shelters to the criminal justice system, Schott said.

"The reason they are on public assistance is because many of them are not really succeeding in the workforce," said Schott, a senior fellow at the Center of Budget and Policy Priorities, a non-partisan research organization.

Arizona's Legislature cut the budgets of an array of programs to meet the governor's no-tax-increase pledge. The bill that included the welfare cuts received overwhelming support earlier this spring from Republicans, with just one Democrat voting in favor.

The Legislature also passed a law seeking to force anyone getting Medicaid to have a job, and cutting off those benefits after five years. And Republican leaders are suing their own state to block a centerpiece of President Barack Obama's health care law, which expanded Medicaid to give more poor people health insurance.

If they prevail, more than 300,000 poor Arizonans could lose their coverage.

Republican Gov. Doug Ducey's office called all these cuts necessary to protect taxpayers and K-12 classrooms — even though the source of the money is the federal government.

Arizona's welfare is entirely federally funded through the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program, but that money comes in a block grant, and Republicans want to use it instead for agencies such as the state's Department of Child Safety.

"The bipartisan, balanced budget passed by the Legislature and signed by the governor protects Arizona's most vulnerable, while avoiding a tax increase," said Daniel Scarpinato, governor's office spokesman.

Democratic Rep. Andrew Sherwood, D-Tempe, said the Republicans made these cuts hastily, voting in the middle of the night in March to avoid transparency.

"This is a very small investment, but it is critical to people who need it the most," Sherwood said. "You're talking about desperate families, those who are unemployed and underemployed. Single mothers and parents with kids."

Former President Bill Clinton signed the block grant law in 1997, making good on a campaign promise to "end welfare as we know it."

The federal government still requires states to make sure recipients have a job, are looking for work, going to school or trying to go to school, but states retain broad discretion in imposing restrictions.

http://news.yahoo.com/facing-1-billi...202816912.html

http://www.alipac.us/f19/22-states-p...tfalls-319364/

It appears that Arizona has run out of other people's money to give to illegals to have kids. JMO

Most Illegal Immigrant Families Collect Welfare

APRIL 05, 2011

Surprise, surprise; Census Bureau data reveals that most U.S. families headed by illegal immigrants use taxpayer-funded welfare programs on behalf of their American-born anchor babies.

Even before the recession, immigrant households with children used welfare programs at consistently higher rates than natives, according to the extensive census data collected and analyzed by a nonpartisanWashington D.C. group dedicated to researching legal and illegal immigration in the U.S. The results, published this month in a lengthy report, are hardly surprising.Basically, the majority of households across the country benefitting from publicly-funded welfare programs are headed by immigrants, both legal and illegal.

States where immigrant households with children have the highest welfare use rates are Arizona (62%), Texas, California and New York with 61% each and Pennsylvania(59%).The study focused on eight major welfare programs that cost the government $517 billion the year they were examined. They include Supplemental Security Income (SSI) for the disabled,

Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF), a nutritional program known as Women, Infants and Children (WIC), food stamps, free/reduced school lunch, public housing and health insurance for the poor (Medicaid).Food assistance and Medicaid are the programs most commonly used by illegal immigrants, mainly on behalf of their American-born children who get automatic citizenship. On the other hand, legal immigrant households take advantage of every available welfare program, according to the study, which attributes it to low education level and resulting low income.The highest rate of welfare recipients come from the Dominican Republic (82 %), Mexico and Guatemala (75%) and Ecuador (70%), according to the report, which says welfare use tends to be high for both new arrivals and established residents.gn Up for Updates




!http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/20...AiYgA.facebook

Read more about illegal immigration

Thread moved from Other Topics to
General Discussion.

From Kaiser Health News.
Medicaid Helps Hospitals Pay For Illegal Immigrants’ Care

By Phil Galewitz
February 12, 2013

Federal law generally bars illegal immigrants from being covered by Medicaid. But a little-known part of the state-federal health insurance program for the poor has long paid about $2 billion a year for emergency treatment for a group of patients who, according to hospitals, mostly comprise illegal immigrants.

The lion’s share goes to reimburse hospitals for delivering babies for women who show up in their emergency rooms, according to interviews with hospital officials and studies.

The funding — which has been around since the late 1980s and is less than 1 percent of the cost of Medicaid — underscores the political and practical challenges of refusing to cover an entire class of people. Congress approved the program after lawmakers required hospitals to screen and stabilize all emergency patients regardless of their insurance or citizenship status.

Some groups say the services encourage people to cross the border for care, while advocates for immigrants say the funding is inadequate because it doesn’t pay for prenatal care and other vital services.

“We can’t turn them away,” said Joanne Aquilina, the chief financial officer of Bethesda Healthcare System in Boynton Beach, Fla., which sees many illegal immigrants because of its proximity to farms where they harvest sugarcane and other seasonal crops.
Nearly one-third of Bethesda Hospital East’s 2,900 births each year are paid for by Emergency Medicaid, the category that covers mainly illegal immigrants. The category includes a small proportion of homeless people and legal immigrants who’ve been in the country less than five years.

Hospitals can’t ask patients whether they’re illegal immigrants, but instead determine that after checking whether they have Social Security numbers, birth certificates or other documents.

“We gather information to qualify patients for something and through that process, if you really hit a dead end, you know they are illegal,” said Steve Short, the chief financial officer at Tampa General Hospital.

A 2007 medical article in the Journal of the American Medical Association reported that 99 percent of those who used Emergency Medicaid during a four-year period in North Carolina were thought to be illegal immigrants.

The Federation for American Immigration Reform, which seeks to limit immigration, said the funding led more women to give birth in the United States, especially since they knew that children born here would be American citizens. The group believes that tens of thousands of “anchor babies” are born each year to illegal immigrants who hope that giving birth to children recognized as citizens will help the women gain legal status themselves.

Anyone born in the United States is a U.S. citizen. It’s unclear how many mothers later get green cards or become citizens.
The Federation for American Immigration Reform doesn’t dispute hospitals’ right to be reimbursed for care they’re required to provide.
“Our focus should be that you could save this money if you prevent the illegal immigration from happening in the first place. You can’t do it after the fact,” said Jack Martin, the special projects director for the organization.

Groups that advocate for immigrants say it’s foolish for Medicaid to pay only for the births and not for the prenatal care that might prevent costly and long-term complications for American children.

“It’s a lose, lose, lose,” said Sonal Ambegaokar, a health policy lawyer at the National Immigration Law Center, which advocates for low-income immigrants. She said denying broad insurance coverage to legal immigrants hurt doctors and hospitals financially, prevented patients from getting needed care and increased costs for the health system.

“There is no evidence that Emergency Medicaid is the cause of migration,” Ambegaokar said. “Immigrants migrate to the U.S. for job opportunities and reunifying with family members.”

Data that Kaiser Health News collected from seven states that are thought to have the highest numbers of illegal immigrants show that the funding pays for emergency services delivered to more than 100,000 people a year.

California hospitals get about half the $2 billion spent annually on Emergency Medicaid. The rest is spread mainly among a handful of states.

In 2011, for example:

• New York spent $528 million on Emergency Medicaid for nearly 30,000 people.
• Texas reported 240,000 claims costing $331 million. (One person could be responsible for multiple claims.)
• Florida spent $214 million on 31,000 patients.
• North Carolina spent $48 million on about 19,000 people.
• Arizona spent $115 million. It couldn’t break out the number of people.
• Illinois spent $25 million on the cost of care to nearly 2,000 people.

The federal government doesn’t require states to report how many people receive services through Emergency Medicaid payments to hospitals.

Legal immigrants who’ve been in the United States less than five years aren’t eligible for regular Medicaid coverage, though states have the option of extending it to children and pregnant women.

Despite the surge in overall Medicaid spending in the past decade, Emergency Medicaid costs have been remarkably stable. A 2004 study by the Government Accountability Office that looked at data from the 10 states with the highest expected Emergency Medicaid costs, reported $2 billion in spending. State officials say spending varies depending on immigration patterns and that during the economic slowdown, the number of illegal immigrants dropped.

The definition of emergency care and the scope of services available through the Medicaid programs vary by state. For example, in New York, Emergency Medicaid may be used to provide chemotherapy and radiation therapy to illegal immigrants. In New York, California and North Carolina, it may be used to provide outpatient dialysis to undocumented patients.

Other states have tried to narrow the definition of “emergency” to limit what’s covered. “Each state has its own interpretation,” said Jane Perkins, the legal director of the National Health Law Program, which advocates for the working poor.

Last year, for instance, Florida changed its policy to pay for emergency services for eligible undocumented immigrants only until their conditions had been “stabilized.” Previously, its policy was to pay for care that was “medically necessary to relieve or eliminate the emergency medical condition.”

Many hospitals — particularly those in the immigrant areas of Miami and Tampa — feared the change would cut millions of dollars in funding. An administrative law judge ruled in December that Florida had enacted the change improperly because it didn’t go through a public hearing process; the state is appealing.

Short, the chief financial officer at Tampa General Hospital, said the $10 million the hospital collected each year to treat illegal immigrants was “very important to us.” He noted that Medicaid pays the hospital about $1,500 for each day a Medicaid patient is in the hospital.

Jackson Memorial Hospital in Miami collects about $50 million a year in Emergency Medicaid funding, according to the state Agency for Health Care Administration.
http://kaiserhealthnews.org/news/med...mergency-care/

Maybe Arizona can borrow some cash from California since we have an $8 BILLION surplus right now that seems to be growing every month.

"In the clearest sign yet that the Great California Recovery is proceeding on pace, Assembly Speaker Toni Atkins announced Tuesday that the state’s budget surplus has climbed as much as $8 billion in the last four months."

California’s budget surplus soars to new heights; schools to benefit

@ http://www.alipac.us/f19/california-...ection-318113/

Originally Posted by JohnDoe2

Maybe Arizona can borrow some cash from California since we have an $8 BILLION surplus right now that seems to be growing every month.

"In the clearest sign yet that the Great California Recovery is proceeding on pace, Assembly Speaker Toni Atkins announced Tuesday that the state’s budget surplus has climbed as much as $8 billion in the last four months."

California’s budget surplus soars to new heights; schools to benefit

@ http://www.alipac.us/f19/california-...ection-318113/

Yep, let's give it to the schools so they can continue to educate illegal immigrants! California's illegal immigrant population (largest in the country) is costing the state billions annually. Just imagine what California could do for their budget if they got rid of the illegals. Right now California citizens (those that pay taxes) have the 2nd highest tax rate burden in the country.

Originally Posted by Newmexican

Surprise, surprise; Census Bureau data reveals that most U.S. families headed by illegal immigrants use taxpayer-funded welfare programs on behalf of their American-born anchor babies.

We really need to end the practice of birthright citizenship.

Some people believe that birthright citizenship is enshrined in our Constitution. That is not true. The text of the 14th Amendment reads, “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.” The critical phrase is bolded.

If the writers of the 14th Amendment intended to legitimize, for example, citizenship for babies born to travelers, there would be no need to include, "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof." As statements by the writers of the Reconstruction Amendments (the 13th, 14th, and 15th) make clear, people who do not owe allegiance to the United States are not included in the provisions of the 14th Amendment. So people who have not sworn an oath of allegiance to our country cannot be considered citizens. Period.

We can of course apply our laws to foreigners who are in our country. If foreigners are convicted of a crime, we can imprison and then deport them. But imprisoning them does not transform them into citizens. It merely makes them criminal aliens whom we will deport.
*****************************************
Americans first in this magnificent country

American jobs for American workers

Fair trade, not free trade

http://www.alipac.us/f12/mostly-lati...ona%94-319785/

$8.6-billion L.A. budget to fill 350,000 potholes, trim 57,000 trees, hire 270 firefighters

San Diego unemployment at more than 7-year low


@ http://www.alipac.us/f19/california-...ection-318113/