*   What benefits are in/out
    *   Head Start and Emergency Medicaid are no longer included but EITC is on the list of benefits which may be considered in the public charge determination.
    *   Some benefits which were specifically excluded in the previous version are not mentioned in the update: school lunch, Child Nutrition Act, National School Lunch Act, child care related services including CCDBGP, foster care and adoption benefits, and benefits provided by non-profit organizations
    *   Some benefits not mentioned on either list before are now specifically excluded: In-state tuition and any gov't student loans, benefits under IDEA, and public benefits received where total annual value is less than 3 FPL for HH of that size for the year
 *   Radical change to the definition of public charge - Under 1999 guidance, the definition included anyone "primarily dependent" on the government for subsistence. The Feb 8 draft just said "dependent." The new language says anyone "who is likely at any time to use or receive one or more public benefits."
 *   Includes an evaluation not just of whether someone has used benefits, but if they (or any dependent) have sought, received, or used a benefit. Just an application for benefits alone could cause problems.
 *   Minimum factors to consider in totality of the circumstances test
    *   Under education and skills, specifies that DHS will review evidence about whether "the alien is proficient in English"
    *   Under health, DHS will consider "whether the alien has any medical condition," how ability to work is impacted by that condition and whether applicant has means (income or non-subsidized health insurance) to pay for treatment.
    *   An affidavit of support (when required) is now listed as one of the minimum factors for consideration
 *   Several major changes to "heavily weighted" positive and negative factors
    *   Still an enumerated list but clarifies that presence of a heavily weighted factor "does not, alone, create a presumption in favor of or against" -- also says that other factors not listed may be weighted heavily.
    *   Current use of benefits or use within the past 36 months is a "heavily weighted negative factor" (in previous draft, the lookback period was only 2 years)
    *   For "heavily weighted positive factors," language about being a "health person of employable age" was removed. Now just need assets, resources and support of at least 250 FPL.
 *   DHS may require the submission of a declaration of self-sufficiency for applicants for admission and adjustment of status.
 *   Issues under the statutory and regulatory requirements section
    *   Claims that the rule is not an unfunded mandate - doesn't exceed the $100 million expenditure threshold in any one year of implementation
    *   Claims that the rule does not have substantial Federalism implications - "will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the National Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government"
 *   Section 237 indicates that new language on public charge deportability criteria will be added
 *   Egregious DHS admissions in preamble
    *   Page 129: "Moreover, DHS notes that we did not specifically estimate the impact and costs of proposed rule on the welfare system for US citizen children who could lose access CHIP, SNAP, or other government-supported public assistance programs for which they are entitled. DHS also was not able to estimate potential lost productivity, early death, or increased disability insurance claims as a result of this proposed rule."
    *   Page 186: Draft admits "The action has the potential to erode family stability and decrease disposable income of families and children because the action provides a strong disincentive for the receipt or use of public benefits by aliens, as well as their household members, including U.S. children." They then go to say that DHS has "compelling legal and policy reasons" to do the rule anyway.

See pink highlight below. This would mean only English proficient people would be allowed into the US. * Leaked Draft - Here is a link<https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4413837/Read-the-Trump-administration-s-draft-proposal.pdf> to the updated draft of the regulation on public charge that was leaked and reported on by the Washington Post today. It's much longer than the earlier leak and includes the preamble to the rule. At NILC and CLASP, we are still analyzing the content, but wanted to share preliminary observations with this group. Below is a non-exhaustive list of the lowlights and changes. If there are other parts of the leaked reg that you would like to underscore for this group, please reply all. I know that many of you are also eager for resources to share with your networks - in addition to the field call<https://register.gotowebinar.com/register/163188805851643138> tomorrow, we will have updated talking points and an updated version of the NPRM fact sheet<https://www.nilc.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Public-Charge-Fact-Sheet-2018.pdf> to share later this week. 3.28.18 NPRM lowlights: * What benefits are in/out * Head Start and Emergency Medicaid are no longer included but EITC is on the list of benefits which may be considered in the public charge determination. * Some benefits which were specifically excluded in the previous version are not mentioned in the update: school lunch, Child Nutrition Act, National School Lunch Act, child care related services including CCDBGP, foster care and adoption benefits, and benefits provided by non-profit organizations * Some benefits not mentioned on either list before are now specifically excluded: In-state tuition and any gov't student loans, benefits under IDEA, and public benefits received where total annual value is less than 3 FPL for HH of that size for the year * Radical change to the definition of public charge - Under 1999 guidance, the definition included anyone "primarily dependent" on the government for subsistence. The Feb 8 draft just said "dependent." The new language says anyone "who is likely at any time to use or receive one or more public benefits." * Includes an evaluation not just of whether someone has used benefits, but if they (or any dependent) have sought, received, or used a benefit. Just an application for benefits alone could cause problems. * Minimum factors to consider in totality of the circumstances test * Under education and skills, specifies that DHS will review evidence about whether "the alien is proficient in English" * Under health, DHS will consider "whether the alien has any medical condition," how ability to work is impacted by that condition and whether applicant has means (income or non-subsidized health insurance) to pay for treatment. * An affidavit of support (when required) is now listed as one of the minimum factors for consideration * Several major changes to "heavily weighted" positive and negative factors * Still an enumerated list but clarifies that presence of a heavily weighted factor "does not, alone, create a presumption in favor of or against" -- also says that other factors not listed may be weighted heavily. * Current use of benefits or use within the past 36 months is a "heavily weighted negative factor" (in previous draft, the lookback period was only 2 years) * For "heavily weighted positive factors," language about being a "health person of employable age" was removed. Now just need assets, resources and support of at least 250 FPL. * DHS may require the submission of a declaration of self-sufficiency for applicants for admission and adjustment of status. * Issues under the statutory and regulatory requirements section * Claims that the rule is not an unfunded mandate - doesn't exceed the $100 million expenditure threshold in any one year of implementation * Claims that the rule does not have substantial Federalism implications - "will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the National Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government" * Section 237 indicates that new language on public charge deportability criteria will be added * Egregious DHS admissions in preamble * Page 129: "Moreover, DHS notes that we did not specifically estimate the impact and costs of proposed rule on the welfare system for US citizen children who could lose access CHIP, SNAP, or other government-supported public assistance programs for which they are entitled. DHS also was not able to estimate potential lost productivity, early death, or increased disability insurance claims as a result of this proposed rule." * Page 186: Draft admits "The action has the potential to erode family stability and decrease disposable income of families and children because the action provides a strong disincentive for the receipt or use of public benefits by aliens, as well as their household members, including U.S. children." They then go to say that DHS has "compelling legal and policy reasons" to do the rule anyway. If you're feeling super depressed after reading that list, let me end this email with 2 "highlights" - 1) The rule is still not retroactive and 2) The updated draft still includes a 60 day notice and comment period. Thanks everyone. We look forward to hearing your thoughts. Madison Hardee Pronouns:she/her/ella Senior Policy Analyst/ Attorney, Income and Work Supports CLASP | 1200 18th Street NW | Suite 200 | Washington, DC 20036 p (202) 906-8000 | c (336) 254-4658 | mhardee@clasp.org<mailto:mhardee@clasp.org>