In recent months, our country’s children have been placed in dire jeopardy because of a federal effort that would deter immigrants from receiving safety-net aid like food stamps, health insurance, or housing assistance. When the possibility of these changes was first announced, some of my peers in philanthropy outlined the devastating impact they could have. Now that the changes have been officially proposed, and as the deadline to act approaches, leaders in philanthropy must be united and clear in defense of families’ access to the resources they need to thrive.
We’re taking action even though our work focuses mainly on health care for children, not immigration advocacy. For decades, the David and Lucile Packard Foundation has supported resources to ensure all children across the nation have access to quality health services. Over the years, the tireless work of our grantees, partner funders, and advocates in the field has paved the way for improved coverage and access to quality health care.
In 2016, an average of 95.5 percent of children across the United States had health insurance, and an integral part of this success was access to public programs like Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program. However, recent attempts at federal and state levels to limit access to these programs are reversing this hard-fought progress for the first time in a decade.
The latest threat is a federal proposal to expand the definition of “public charge” — a person determined likely to become dependent on the government as the main source of support and who is therefore ineligible for a green card. In October, the Department of Homeland Security proposed to expand the programs used to make the public-charge determination, including health-care coverage, housing, and food. People who access those services would face a far tougher time adjusting their immigration status.
If that proposal becomes final, it could drive families away from the basic services legally available to them that are so important to their children’s health. We must all pause and consider what this means — sick children without access to health care, hungry families without access to food, and entire communities without the tools they need to prosper — all when there are resources legally available to them that we should be encouraging them to use.
Impact Is Already Being Felt
The stakes are high for families across the country regardless of their immigration status. In a November report, Manatt Health, a research company studying the rule on behalf of several nonprofits, estimated that 13.2 million people who are enrolled in Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program might decide to abandon their benefits if the rule becomes final. This includes 8.8 million children and adults who are citizens with a noncitizen family member.
The very prospect of the rule is already having an impact. When reports first emerged that the draft rule was in the works, local health providers reported getting panicked calls from immigrant families demanding to be removed from a supplemental nutrition program for women and children. With the rule now officially proposed, there have been reports of people refusing to sign up for health insurance and asking to be taken off the rolls.
Philanthropy and government share many of the same goals, including to make sure our children and families have secure, promising futures. However, it is only when our efforts complement each other that we can ensure success. In this case, philanthropy must make absolutely clear that this rule would grievously harm children and families’ livelihoods.
Enacting a regulation that undermines the health and well-being of children runs counter to our values as a foundation and our ideals as a nation. It is for these reasons that the Packard Foundation has gone on record with a public comment against the proposed rule.
The rule would have a devastating impact on millions of children, their families, and their communities across the country. I’ve been grateful that many of the nation’s leading advocates and organizations focused on children’s health have already submitted comments as well, and I encourage our partners across philanthropy to publicly oppose the proposed rule before Monday’s deadline.
Carol S. Larson is the president and CEO of the David and Lucile Packard Foundation, a family foundation guided by the enduring business philosophy and personal values of Lucile and David Packard.
