“A Response to Criticisms of the President’s Public Charge and an Attempt to get at the Facts and Truth Beyond Left-Wing Rhetoric,” by Andrew. J. Schatkin

“A Response to Criticisms of the President’s Public Charge and an Attempt to get at the Facts and Truth Beyond Left-Wing Rhetoric,” by Andrew. J. Schatkin

This essay will consider and explain the President’s proposed public charge rule, which has been attacked and criticized by the left wing press and media, I think, unfairly, unjustly and incorrectly. In this rule, which was published in the Federal Register this Monday, the President proposes to reject green cards for people likely to depend on government aid such as food stamps, housing assistance, and Medicaid. The rule is linked to income and the use of public programs. The rule is appropriate and seeks to address the issue of, frankly, whether one on public assistance or likely to be so should be given some sort or right to residence when they are or will abuse our social benefits network and will be a ward of the government and not contributing to our society with gainful employment and should not either be supported by government programs or seek to be so. Several local newspapers in Queens, NY rail at and criticize the President for this rule. The Bayside Times of August 30 through Sept 5, in an editorial, the attorney general says the rule targets immigrants of color, with disabilities, and low-income immigrants. The attorney general says immigrants would have the choice of food and shelter and access to health coverage and says the President is racist and xenophobic. In a similar article in the Queens Courier of Sept. 4, by the reporter Bill Parry. In this article, the borough President Ms. Katz calls the rule an attack on immigrant families, anti-immigrant, and un-American. Ms. Katz states that immigrants will be forced to choose between legal residency and food on the table, medical care, and shelter, and the rule would include such programs as the basis for denying a green card such as Medicaid, Section 8 housing assistance, and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance program.

Both of these journals in their views and opinions which they are entitled to are not only mistaken but miss the point .The rule in fact seeks to address the issue whether those on public assistance in some form are entitled to be here, and in fact such persons already have come here taking advantage of our social benefits network. It is likely these persons have come to this country to avail themselves of our welfare system and the President is right in seeking to stop this obvious abuse of our system. Should these persons obviously manipulating our system be entitled to and get more from our system? I think not and I ask Ms. Katz, the Attorney General, and Bayside Times, and the Queens Courier to rethink this issue and take a second and closer at their views.