Former Trump legal adviser May Mailman and California GOP delegate Roxanne Hoge join ‘ @ Night’ to discuss California offering free health care to illegal immigrants and growing criticism facing DEI. The Golden State is expanding its massive health care system this year, which means more taxpayer dollars will fund sex change surgeries for state residents, regardless of their citizenship status.
According to a memo first circulated in May 2022 and reported by the Daily Caller Foundation, California’s Medi-Cal covers costs for hormone therapy and procedures “that bring primary and secondary gender characteristics into conformity with the individual’s identified gender, including ancillary services, such as hair removal, incident to those services.” Nearly 700,000 illegal immigrants between the ages of 26 and 49 qualify, as of Jan. 1, for these federal health care services, which will cost California taxpayers an estimated $3.1 billion. For those living in California illegally within this age range, it translates to approximately $4,058 per year in medical coverage subsidies funded by the state’s general fund.
The memo states that “gender affirming care is a covered Medi-Cal benefit when medically necessary,” and requests for such care should come from specialists experienced in providing culturally competent care to transgender and gender diverse individuals, following nationally recognized guidelines. The determination of “medical necessity” is made by licensed mental health professionals and physicians experienced in treating patients with incongruence between their gender identity and gender assigned at birth.
From Dec. 1 to Dec. 31, over 302,000 migrants were documented attempting to cross the U.S. southern border, marking the highest total for a single month ever recorded and the first time monthly migrant encounters surpassed 300,000. A recent report from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) reveals a significant rise in the number of undocumented immigrants not held in detention, increasing from 3.7 million in 2021 to almost 4.8 million in 2022 and nearly 6.2 million in 2023. These are illegal migrants with final orders to leave or who are in the process of being removed but aren’t held in ICE custody.
“In California, we believe everyone deserves access to quality, affordable health care coverage — regardless of income or immigration status,” Gov. Newsom’s office reportedly said in a statement. “Through this expansion, we’re making sure families and communities across California are healthier, stronger, and able to get the care they need when they need it.” Newsom announced California would begin providing health care coverage to additional illegal immigrants on top of the 1.1 million already in the Medi-Cal system. More than one-third of California’s shrinking population of 39 million is enrolled in the Medi-Cal program.
California has been incrementally adding illegal immigrants to the Medi-Cal program since 2015, starting with undocumented children and later including adults aged 50 and older.
Critics argue that using taxpayer funds for health care services for undocumented immigrants is unfair to citizens and legal residents. They express concerns over the rising costs of such services and the strain it puts on the state’s budget. However, supporters argue that providing health care to all residents, regardless of immigration status, promotes a healthier and more inclusive society.
The expansion of health care coverage to undocumented immigrants in California has sparked a heated debate, highlighting the ongoing contentious issue of immigration and the role of government in providing services to non-citizens. As the state continues to grapple with the challenges of a changing population and limited resources, the discussion around immigration and health care is likely to persist.
Overall, this controversial move by California to expand health care coverage to undocumented immigrants has drawn both praise and criticism, reflecting the deep divide on immigration and government spending in the United States. The decision raises questions about the priorities and responsibilities of state governments, as well as the impact on taxpayers and the overall well-being of communities.
