Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Immigration Welfare topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Panel hears bill to restrict local welfare to citizens and permanent residents; immigration-law experts warn of federal exceptions
Summary
House Bill 458 would limit municipal welfare assistance to U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents; immigration and refugee-service witnesses testified that federal law requires exceptions for refugees, asylees and certain visa categories and urged careful drafting to avoid undermining federal public-safety and human-trafficking visas.
House Bill 458, introduced Feb. 4, would bar municipal local assistance from being granted to anyone who is not a U.S. citizen or a lawful permanent resident. Representative Deborah Elward presented the bill; she did not remain for the entire hearing. The committee took testimony from immigration-law and refugee-service experts warning the measure as drafted omits categories that federal law requires states to treat differently.
Stephen Tower, an attorney with New Hampshire Legal Assistance and the committee’s invited expert, told members that federal law (8 U.S.C. § 1622 and related provisions) lists exceptions to general ineligibility for noncitizens, including refugees and asylees during their initial years in the United States, lawful entrants associated with U.S. military service, and other categories. Tower urged the committee to either enumerate which immigrant categories the legislature intends to exclude from municipal assistance or explicitly preserve the federal exceptions in state law. He also asked the committee to consider the humanitarian and law-enforcement rationale for permitting assistance to T‑ and U‑visa recipients (victims of trafficking or serious crimes cooperating with authorities).
Bill Gillet, director of public policy for the International Institute of New England, emphasized refugees’ successful resettlement pathway and said refugees and asylees are lawfully present, authorized to work and generally on a path to permanent residence and citizenship. He urged the legislature not to create a bar that would harm vulnerable people who are legally present and subject to federal vetting.
Committee members heard a large volume of remote testimony on the bill; the chair reported 14 online supporters and 173 opposed. No vote was taken at the public hearing.
The committee will consider statutory clarity and whether to adopt enumeration of federal exceptions before advancing any proposal.
