Written Testimony in Opposition to Sections 1 and 3 of H.F. 10

PDF Version

Chair Nash and Members of the House State and Local Government Finance Committee:

We write to express our opposition to Sections 1 and 3 of H.F. 10 (Schultz). The Catholic Church includes as its members those who are undocumented, as well as serves those who are undocumented in its educational, charitable, and healthcare programs. We serve people because we are Catholic, not because they are.

Section 1 is written so broadly as to deny any “service” to an undocumented person. “Service” is not defined. An undocumented person may seek assistance or services of various forms, including from programs subsidized by state funds. Those could include basic humanitarian assistance such as emergency shelters or food banks. It could also include services provided by law enforcement or emergency medical services. “Service” could also be read to include public schools.

The intent of the scope of the prohibition is unclear, but it could be read so broadly as to make inaccessible any program or service—even if performed by a non-governmental provider—as illegal if it has any nexus to state funds.

The MinnesotaCare prohibition in Section 3 is equally concerning, because could inhibits access to basic healthcare. In general, undocumented immigrants are ineligible for Medicaid and cannot access the ACA’s insurance marketplace. So, unless an undocumented immigrant has the means for very expensive commercial insurance, MinnesotaCare is the only option for him or her. Because immigrants have a right to treatment, they can access emergency services, which ends up being extremely costly to both the insurance pool and the taxpayer. It is for those reasons, and others, that many healthcare provider organizations supported the immigrant inclusion act in 2023.

Refusing to provide access to health insurance or other services solely ton the basis of one’s legal status is a simplistic and blunt approach to a more complex problem. Our immigration system is broken and needs to be fixed at the federal level. Until then, as Minnesotans we can take steps to ensure the basic dignity and needs of our immigrant brothers and sisters, such as offering the opportunity to provide basic services to people when needed.

We recognize the long-term budget numbers are cloudy, but we also encourage you to prioritize basic human needs over other items that might be considered amenities. Thank you for your consideration.

Respectfully yours,

Jason Adkins
Executive Director
[email protected]