Michelle Malkin » Shamnesty Watch: S-CHIP loophole – New health care benefits for illegal aliens?

Shamnesty Watch: S-CHIP loophole – New health care benefits for illegal aliens?

By Michelle Malkin • September 25, 2007 11:51 AM

I’m getting several heads-up e-mails about a loophole in the recently House-passed S-CHIP bill that might create a new path for illegal alien health care benefits.

One Hill staffer writes:

Many people are saying during conference the conferees fixed the illegal immigration issues that pertain to the House-passed SCHIP bill by adopting the Senate language which said the Social Security Administration (SSA) will verify citizenship status. I do not see that as being the case after reading Title II Subtitle B.

Having the state submit names and SS#’s to the SSA does not close the loophole! All SSA can do is verify that the SS# is a valid SS# or not. This does not prove that someone is in the US legally. Illegal immigrants can still use a stolen valid SS#’s to get benefits—just as they do to gain illegal employment. The only way to guard against illegal immigrants from getting benefits is for them to show immigration documents—not SS#’s!

Additionally, Title VI Section 605 reads as follows: “No Federal Funding for Illegal Aliens. This section clarifies that nothing under this Act allows Federal funding to be spent on illegal aliens.” I feel this text is worthless if they are just checking SS#’s because there is no true verification of immigration status.

Here’s a Dear Colleague letter sent today by Rep. Nathan Deal alerting his fellow reps:

Dear Colleague,

Later today, the Democratic Leadership will ask you to vote on a deeply flawed bill that seeks to spend billions of taxpayer-funded dollars to facilitate the enrollment of illegal aliens onto the rolls of the Medicaid Program. In fact, by overturning the existing federal requirement that States document the citizenship status and identity of individuals applying for public assistance under the Medicaid program, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates federal taxpayers will be forced to spend an additional $3.7 billion over the next ten years. When you add the required State-level spending, this results in a total $6.5 billion being spent on individuals who wouldn’t otherwise be qualified to receive these benefits.

H.R. 976 defrauds the American taxpayer out of billions of dollars by allowing States to use Social Security Numbers in the place of documents that actually prove citizenship status and identity. In response to this ridiculous provision, the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service (CRS) had the following response: “A Social Security card (or having a valid SSN) does not denote citizenship, and is not useful for determining citizenship status . . . Social Security cards issued to noncitizens who are residing permanently in the United States are identical to those issued to U.S. citizens. In addition, aliens who are in the United States temporarily are also eligible for valid SSNs.” (CRS Memorandum, “The Usefulness of Social Security Cards for Determining U.S. Citizenship”)

In a recent letter to Ranking Member McCrery, the Commissioner of Social Security, Michael Astrue, reinforces CRS’s findings and repeatedly states that his agency cannot determine the citizenship status of an individual by simply matching a name with a Social Security Number. Making the language in H.R. 976 even more egregious is the fact that this provision allows applicants to be approved for public assistance money without even showing any proof that they actually are the person they are claiming to be. Under this scheme, an individual could simply steal your name and Social Security Number and use it to access thousands of dollars in taxpayer-funded benefits. Is this the kind of behavior that the Democratic Leadership is seeking to encourage?

While I am a strong supporter of the SCHIP program, I simply cannot vote for a bill that flagrantly encourages illegal aliens to break our immigration laws and fraudulently enroll in taxpayer-funded public assistance programs. I ask that you join with me in voting against this deeply flawed bill and for a shorter-term extension of the existing program. Hopefully, with more time, we can develop a bipartisan, long-term reauthorization which will actually uphold our existing immigration laws.

Respectfully,
Nathan Deal
Ranking Member
Subcommittee on Health Committee on Energy and Commerce

Here’s the reply from the SSA’s Astrue to Rep. McCrery’s questions about the verification process/capabilities:

If it looks like shamnesty and quacks like shamnesty, it is shamnesty.

The switchboard for Congress is 202-224-3121.

Posted in: Amnesty

Regular View

comments (15)

trackbacks (5)

See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Trackbacks

Trackback URL

Comments

#134219

On September 25th, 2007 at 11:56 am, ajmontana said:

Here is a list of Sen. up for re-election. Work on these.

List
#134250

On September 25th, 2007 at 1:05 pm, AlohaGuy said:

No illegal left behind…
#134254

On September 25th, 2007 at 1:14 pm, walterc said:

Would it be possible to stop referring to Chuck Hagel as a Republican. He’s more of a RINO than McCain.

Maybe would should just have RINO declared a third party.
#134264

On September 25th, 2007 at 1:38 pm, Bad Candy said:

Looks like they’re gonna work on slipping another one through. We’re in a lot of trouble, aren’t we?
#134276

On September 25th, 2007 at 2:10 pm, Heartland Perspective said:

Do I read correctly that the House already passed their version (with the aforementioned language)and so we have to stop same in the Senate bill? Who are we supposed to call..senate/house/both?
#134287

On September 25th, 2007 at 2:38 pm, Wile E Coyote said:

This is probably the most ridiculous excuse I’ve seen yet for some members of the Republican party to vote against an important and needed expansion to a popular program for children. The excuse about the SS numbers not being able to tell if someone is legal or not is a red herring. Why mandate this requirement to prove citizenship in this particular bill? Why isn’t this mandate included in every bill or made a federal law?

Because it can be used to divide the Republican party, that’s why. And by dividing the Replicans, you kill the bill.
#134290

On September 25th, 2007 at 2:58 pm, crashemt said:

Might as well implement it. My health record is about the only thing the SSN only identity theives haven’t tainted, so why not just go for the full set.

I think I may quit my job, get a tan, start speaking spanish, so I can be drunk all day, father a ton of kids with multiple women, get free health and tax free income, and be eligible for SSA in 10 years (I’ll pretend to be a 55 year old illegal). Maybe they’ll give me a house, too!
#134322

On September 25th, 2007 at 4:19 pm, gayle said:

crashemt; LOL!

Ain’t that the truth!
Since I cannot speak Spanish and do not plan to ….I pretend to be mute.

Think that will work??

(gee, I have green eyes….do not think
that will pass the test. Darn!)
#134323

On September 25th, 2007 at 4:19 pm, gayle said:

I’ll ……dang grammar.
#134325

On September 25th, 2007 at 4:21 pm, gayle said:

I just thought of something most unusual in my county.

I have NEVER seen a Mexican wearing glasses, prescription that is.

Has anyone else?

Wonder why?
#134326

On September 25th, 2007 at 4:29 pm, LC said:

Seems to me that Section 301 should be renamed the “willing suspension of disbelief clause.”
#134350

On September 25th, 2007 at 5:10 pm, Boomer said:

Will get out another e-mail to Senator Crapo today, been putting in long hours for fiscal year close-out finally caught a break in my workload. No use in contacting Craig he is a total sell-out and he had better resign on Sunday or he will be run out of Idaho on a rail.
#134393

On September 25th, 2007 at 6:50 pm, 24Klady said:

As ignorant as most people are on this subject – witness Pelosi’s wailing on national broadcasts this afternoon about the promise by the President to veto this thing and how it will affect 10 million children, how those children will “suffer” – I’m fast reaching the conclusion to give up, and let the danged thing pass. You talk about a hammer any idiot could use in the 2008 elections against any incumbent that has voted for it. It’s horrid to think about but perhaps that’s the only way to force people to wake up – see what they’ve slept through, how it will dig deep into their finances and was passed, while they couldn’t be bothered to call, write, or fax their elected critters. I’ve a long list of grievances I fully plan to trot out for anyone that courts my vote. /vent off.

Now, I’ll get busy sending more mail to those morons sitting on the fence. Thanks AJ for the links.
#134612

On September 26th, 2007 at 9:33 am, Pixel_Dust_1776 said:

I wonder if Soros is behind this whole murky scheme……..
If he is, we won’t find out until about a year after the fact. Oh!!!…the so called “political transparency”……here are some details:
http://ibdeditorial.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=275526219598836

Rio
Semper Fi!
#134741

On September 26th, 2007 at 3:09 pm, USMCgramma said:

Orrin Hatch spoke at the end of Glenn Beck’s program and I can’t believe how out of touch he is – it’s all about how he thinks those “children” who arrived here illegally without their full consent deserve educational benefits the taxpayers children do not and never have had. Unfortunately, he and too many of his cohorts (all his “esteemed colleagues”) have been in Congress too ~~#$%@~~ long.