Personal Responsibility Act Essay, Research Paper
Study of the Personal Responsibility Act
In 1994 Governor Pete Wilson and the California Legislature passed a referendum that cut assistance to illegal aliens. When the House Republicans heard about this new law in California, they were encouraged to develop a federal law that would put tougher restrictions on both legal and illegal aliens. On January 4, 1996, the House Republicans formally introduced its Personal Responsibility Act, a welfare reform bill to put more restrictions on both legal and illegal aliens. (Glastris, Now the War 57) This Act included many provisions that were necessary to control the immigration problem, both legal and illegal, but at the same time many of the provisions were hurtful and unnecessary.
House Republicans began making plans for the bill when Congress reconvened on the fourth of January 1996. There were many provisions in this bill that would not only severely limit immigrants, but could force many of them from the United States. The bill would make it difficult for those who have been deported to re-enter the country. To enforce this, there were plans for more agents to patrol the airports and borders. In addition, those who attempt to come to the United States by seeking political asylum may also be deported because of new limits on judicial review. Another provision would stop illegal immigrants from seeking employment. A new system for employers would be created to help them catch illegal aliens applying for jobs. The new system, which is controlled by computers, will allow the employer to check an individual s background and find out whether or not the individual is a legal citizen. Congress plans to add more aggressive measures to prevent legal immigrants from using welfare. (Glastris, Writing Murphy s Law 31-32) Legal immigrants who have committed crimes that require over a year in jail could face deportation to their country of origin and their rights of appeal will be severely limited (Ackerman 30). Finally, the worst of all the provisions, according to Steven Roberts is, this bill could bar illegal children immigrants from attending public schools (28).
The Commission on Immigration Reform recommended another provision for the bill that would stop immigrants from abusing the Medicaid and Supplementary Security Income Systems. Their two-step solution will first stop immigrants who are only coming to the United States for Medicaid and SSI from being issued visas. If they want to enter the United States, their relatives who sponsor them must pay for the immigrant s health insurance. The second step is to have all those who sponsor immigrants sign a document stating that the government can deduct any service cost for the immigrant out of the sponsor s pay. (Glastris, Writing Murphy s Law 32)
American citizens, the Democrats, and even the Republicans were divided on the issue of whether or not the bill should pass. Many Americans felt that immigrants should not be restricted because they have done a great deal to help the United States economy. They said that because the United States was founded on immigration, Americans should always welcome some immigrants (Roberts 29). An example of this is seen the real estate market where immigrants are constantly buying property. In the Rowland Heights Area of Los Angeles, four out of five homebuyers are Asian immigrants. Other Americans who support the bill said that it is good because immigrants only hurt the economy. They believe that immigrants flood their cities, drain their services and dilute their culture (Roberts 29).
The split in the Democratic Party was between Clinton and many other Democrats. Clinton was against the referendum that was passed in California and said that he planned to veto the current legislation in Congress if it banned children from attending public schools. The Democrats supported the bill because they wanted to show their toughness in terms of immigrant law enforcement.
The Republicans were also split on the issue. Rep Elton Gallegyly, who was the leading immigration critic, said that something must be done about the immigrants because his hometown just outside Los Angeles now looks like a Third World City (Roberts 28). On the other hand, Senator Spencer Abraham of Michigan believes that Americans should embrace the immigrants because they had a great deal to do with the formation of this country (28). Many Republican governors were also against the bill because they were afraid that if the federal government took welfare and other benefits away from immigrants, then the aliens would run to the states for assistance, thereby causing the states to lose more money. The House Republicans said that the bill will save the government twenty-two billion dollars, but others say that the bill will only cause more immigrants to become citizens, costing the United States the money they hoped to save. (Roberts 28)
The bill did pass both the House and the Senate and became known as the Personal Responsibility And Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996. Many of the original provisions of the bill were kept. The provision, which stated that the children of illegal aliens could not attend public schools, however, was defeated and deleted from the bill (Glastris, Writing Murphy s Law 31). Since the bill s passage, many immigrants who have committed crimes that required a sentence of over one year in prison have been deported. In 1997 alone, 169,000 individuals who had committed crimes were deported. The law even prompted the Immigration and Naturalization Service to begin a program called Operation Last Call whose purpose was to find all immigrants with three or more drunk driving convictions. So far, the program has apprehended at least five hundred thirty immigrants. The provision in the new law, which requires criminals to be deported, has caused many problems for the INS. They do not have enough beds to house all the people who have been found and are awaiting deportation. (Ackerman 30)
Since 1998, Congressional negotiators have been trying to create a new bill, which will restore food stamps to many legal immigrants who were banned from using them in the 1996 law. This new bill would use over six hundred forty-two million dollars over a five-year period for benefits for immigrants. Supporters of this bill feel that it is good, but they still want more money for the immigrants. This bill may not pass because of the drafted budget resolution that will use food stamps savings for highway and transportation spending. It also may not pass because it cannot be amended when it passes through the House or the Senate. (Anderson 1-2)
There are parts of this law that are unnecessary and there are other parts that are necessary. The one provision that does not need to be in this law is the one that prevents legal immigrants from receiving welfare and using government aid programs. They should be allowed to receive aid and food stamps because that will give them the time they need to get their lives together and become productive members of the American society. If the government takes this away from them, there could be more immigrants living in poverty who have not had the chance to free themselves from their destitute lives. Fortunately, Congress is now working to reverse this provision. It is necessary, however, to deport immigrants who commit crimes because by committing these crimes, they are not acting as productive members of society. Instead they are causing the United State to regress. The law is good in that it prevents illegal aliens from trying to work. It is not fair to allow illegal immigrants to take jobs that are supposed to be for legal residents and citizens of the United States. The large number of illegal immigrants entering the country can make more of the residents and citizens unemployed, leading them to government assistance. In a general sense, this law is good for America because it will cause immigrants in this country to stop their criminal behavior and learn to be productive members of the American society.
Works Cited
Anderson, Curt. Immigrants Could Regain Food Aid in Bill. Detroit Free Press 25 Mar. 1998. World Wide Web. ResNet. Available http://www.thefreep.com. (21 Nov 1999.)
Ackerman, Elise. An Immigrant Roundup. US News and World Report 7 Dec. 1998: 30.
Glastris, Paul, Now, the War on Legal Aliens. US News and World Report 2 Jan. 1995: 57-58.
Glastris, Paul. Writing Murphy s Law. US News and World Report 7 Oct. 1996: 31-32.
Roberts, Steven, and Anne Kates Smith. Uncle Sam, Bar the Door. US News and World Report 4 April 1996: 28-29.