Racial quotas for immigration are back | Heba Gowayed

Contributing sentiments towards policy:

53% : Those who do qualify for benefits like Snap and Medicaid use them at much lower rates than non-immigrants.
48% : Through their taxes, immigrants are net contributors – especially undocumented immigrants who are excluded from federal benefits.I also noted a pattern uniting the countries on the list: nearly all were also restricted through the 1924 Immigration Act’s racial quotas.Abolished in 1965, due to the civil-rights movement’s demands for equality of all races under the law, racial quotas were at the heart of the 1924 Immigration Act, also called the Johnson-Reed Act, which for four decades restricted immigration to the United States on the basis of nation of origin.Albert Johnson, its lead author, was a representative from Washington, and a eugenicist, who believed that “our capacity to maintain our cherished institutions stands diluted by a stream of alien blood”.
42% : The purpose of this immigration ban, like the other travel bans this administration has passed, has nothing to do with economics.
41% : The Department of Homeland Security justified the decision by claiming that immigrants from these countries are at “high risk” of reliance on welfare and becoming a “public charge”.As an immigration scholar, I was immediately struck by the falsehood of this economic justification.
40% : The vast majority of immigrants have been legally disqualified from cash welfare since 1996.

*Our bias meter rating uses data science including sentiment analysis, machine learning and our proprietary algorithm for determining biases in news articles. Bias scores are on a scale of -100% to 100% with higher negative scores being more liberal and higher positive scores being more conservative, and 0% being neutral. The rating is an independent analysis and is not affiliated nor sponsored by the news source or any other organization.