Arizona’s Legislative Debate over Hospital Admission and Immigration Status
The contentious issue of asking patients about their immigration status at hospitals receiving public funds has sparked a heated debate in Arizona’s legislature. With both the House and Senate passing a measure spearheaded by Rep. Ralph Heap and Sen. Wendy Rogers, the proposal mandates hospitals to inquire about the legal status of patients while assuring them that their responses will neither affect their care nor be reported to immigration authorities.
Despite these assurances, Sen. Analise Ortiz expressed skepticism, highlighting the risks associated with data sharing. “Right now we know that no personal information is safe from being given over to ICE who is killing people in the streets, including United States citizens,” Ortiz, a Phoenix Democrat, stated.
Concerns extend beyond privacy, with opponents like Sen. Sally Ann Gonzales warning that fear of being questioned might deter people from seeking necessary medical care, potentially escalating minor health issues into more serious conditions. This avoidance could not only endanger public health but also lead to increased healthcare costs, as hospitals are federally mandated to provide emergency care regardless of a patient’s legal status.
The debate, filled with fervent arguments, saw Sen. Lauren Kuby of Tempe accusing the measure of instilling fear in communities, describing it as a tactic of “intimidation and terrorizing.”
On the other side, Sen. Wendy Rogers defended the proposal, framing it as a financial accountability measure. “This is an accountancy bill,” Rogers stated, arguing that the aim is to quantify the financial impact of providing healthcare to undocumented immigrants.
Supporting this viewpoint, Sen. Jake Hoffman of Queen Creek emphasized the financial burden posed by illegal immigration, estimating the national cost at $150 billion, a figure largely attributed to education and healthcare expenses. “Hospital systems are burdened because of illegal aliens,” Hoffman asserted, suggesting that this strain results in diminished care quality for American citizens.
Despite the focus on financial implications, Sen. Catherine Miranda of Laveen dismissed the proposal as unnecessarily harsh, while others like Sen. Priya Sundareshan pointed to recent federal funding cuts as a more pressing concern for hospital financial struggles.
In a similar vein, Gov. Katie Hobbs, who previously vetoed a comparable proposal, criticized the measure for overstepping into immigration enforcement, a domain she believes should remain with federal authorities.
Opponents also argue that undocumented immigrants contribute significantly to taxes without receiving proportional benefits, with studies indicating contributions of around $100 billion annually. Sen. Gonzales remarked, “Instead of asking for reporting and the immigration status, we should be asking the federal government and using that money to provide health care for anybody.”
As the debate continues, the future of the legislation remains uncertain, with potential implications for both healthcare access and state finances hanging in the balance.
—
Read More Arizona News
