"Is It Appropriate for the Government to Provide Funding for Healthcare and Education of Illegal Immigrants? " is a perfect example of a paper on social and family issues. The idea of government-funded health care for immigrants has many supporters who believe that immigrants should be afforded these benefits simply as a matter of human rights. From an economic perspective, “ immigrants are obligated to pay taxes that fund public services. For (this) and other reasons, they should have the same eligibility to public services as U. S. citizens” (nilc. org, 2006, p. 1). If immigrants are supplying government revenues which can be utilized for infrastructure developments or better health care technologies, it would seem to be appropriate justice to ensure that immigrant taxpayers have access to the same benefits as other taxpaying citizens.
Those who support this type of government-funded immigrant health benefit would argue that immigrants’ economic and business contributions to the United States would give them credit for access to the very services their tax dollars are funding, however obligatory. This same rationale can be used for government-funded education since this group is paying taxes which are applied to educational policies and programs for the general citizen population. Those who argue against such a program make the argument that immigrants tend to use less health care even when it is available.
From either the cultural or socio-economic level, immigrants tend to use less emergency room services or wait until their conditions worsen before seeking medical help. The costs, therefore, of their visits for treatment become higher when more advanced procedures or treatments are necessary to treat the illness. Supporters would offer that giving immigrants access to government-funded health care would give them the incentive to seek health care assistance much sooner, therefore removing some of the cost burden associated with care which has been procrastinated. People who would argue against the government-funded provision of education for immigrants might suggest that it would take away opportunities from natural-born students who already have limited access to state education funds in states with declining budgets.
In difficult economic conditions, states are cutting many parts of their budgets including provision for education and health care (Amato, 2009). If the natural-born citizen is concerned about whether their educational grants will be provided, adding additional immigrant strain on this system could take opportunities away from those who had, in actuality, earned the government funds through superior academic achievement. From a personal perspective, I believe that health care should be afforded to immigrants simply because of their positive contribution to communities and societies.
Immigrants provide stability to commerce and business and have become a quality stakeholder in the economic and social development within the country. A local community, or a broader population, is only as effective as its most healthy and educated citizens, therefore not granting these benefits to immigrants can take away from productivity or quality of life in a region.
If workers are healthy and have transferrable skills provided by higher education, it is likely they will be long-term contributors to the health and wealth of the region and inspire many innovations in business and technology.
Amato, Dan. “The sinking lifeboat: Uncontrolled immigration and the U.S. health care system in 2009”, 2009. Accessed 20 November 2009 from http://www.diggersrealm.com/mt/archives/003236.html.
Nilc.org. “Facts about immigrants’ low use of health care and public benefits”. National Immigration Law Center, 2006. Accessed 19 November 2009 from http://www.nilc.org/immspbs/research/research002.htm