LIFT the BAR Act
- Sponsor
- Rep. Jayapal, Pramila [D-WA-7]
- Committees
- Financial Services Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Jun 30, 2026
Bottom line
The LIFT the BAR Act significantly expands eligibility for federal public benefits to a wider array of lawfully present noncitizens by repealing restrictive welfare reform provisions and recent reconciliation act changes.
What it actually does
This bill, the LIFT the BAR Act, largely repeals provisions from the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA) and Public Law 119-21 that restrict access to federal public benefits for noncitizens. It expands eligibility for programs such as SNAP, Medicaid, CHIP, Medicare, and housing assistance to a broader range of lawfully present noncitizens, including those with deferred action status or pending visa applications. Additionally, it restores premium tax credits for certain lawfully present noncitizens previously deemed ineligible.
Proponents argue
Proponents argue that the bill rectifies discriminatory policies that have historically denied essential services to lawfully present noncitizens, many of whom contribute significantly to the U.S. economy and society through taxes and labor. They contend that expanding access to basic assistance like healthcare and food security will improve public health outcomes, reduce poverty, and strengthen communities, ultimately benefiting the nation as a whole by ensuring stability for all residents. Supporters also highlight that many noncitizens are taxpayers and should not be excluded from programs they help fund.
Opponents contend
Opponents contend that expanding federal public benefits to a broader category of noncitizens would place an unsustainable financial burden on federal and state budgets, potentially diverting resources from programs for citizens and legal permanent residents. They argue that such expansions could act as a 'pull factor,' incentivizing further irregular migration and straining social services. Critics also express concerns about the administrative complexities and potential for fraud associated with significantly broadening eligibility criteria across multiple federal programs.
The bill is concise and relatively easy to read, allowing an informed reader to grasp its core changes within a short timeframe.
Section 2(a)(1)
Repeal of PRWORA Eligibility Restrictions
This provision repeals several key sections of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA). Specifically, it eliminates sections 402, 403, 411, 412, 421, and 422, which established various restrictions on the eligibility of noncitizens for federal, state, and local public benefits. The repeal of these sections would remove the general five-year bar on federal means-tested public benefits for many qualified noncitizens and other restrictions, thereby restoring eligibility for a wider range of lawfully present noncitizens to programs like SNAP, Medicaid, and TANF.
Supporters argue
Proponents argue that these PRWORA sections were unduly punitive and created a two-tiered system of benefits access, harming vulnerable noncitizens and their families. They contend that repealing these restrictions aligns with humanitarian values and ensures that all lawfully present individuals can access essential services, contributing to overall societal well-being and economic stability.
Critics contend
Opponents argue that PRWORA's restrictions were necessary to control federal spending, encourage self-sufficiency, and prioritize benefits for citizens. They contend that repealing these sections would lead to a substantial increase in federal expenditures and could create a greater incentive for individuals to enter the U.S. primarily to access public benefits.
Tradeoffs
The provision balances the humanitarian goal of providing a safety net for all lawfully present residents against concerns about fiscal costs and potential impacts on immigration patterns.
Section 2(a)(2)
Repeal of Public Law 119-21 Benefit Restrictions
This section repeals specific provisions from Public Law 119-21 that imposed new restrictions on noncitizen eligibility for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), Medicaid, the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP), and Medicare. By repealing these sections, the bill restores the eligibility criteria for these programs to their state prior to the enactment of Public Law 119-21, effectively expanding access to these critical health and nutrition benefits for noncitizens who were previously excluded by that law.
Section 2(c)
Terminology Update: 'Noncitizen' for 'Alien'
This section systematically replaces the term 'alien' with 'noncitizen' throughout Title IV of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA). This change is a linguistic and conceptual update, reflecting a shift in preferred terminology to be more inclusive and less pejorative. While primarily a semantic change, it signals a broader policy intent to view individuals who are not U.S. citizens through a different lens, potentially influencing how policies are interpreted and implemented.
Section 2(d)
Expanded Definition of 'Qualified Noncitizen'
This provision significantly expands the definition of 'qualified noncitizen' in Section 431 of PRWORA, making more categories of lawfully present noncitizens eligible for federal public benefits. It includes individuals who were treated as lawfully present for Affordable Care Act purposes on or before January 1, 2025, those who met specific PRWORA requirements by that date, special immigrant juveniles, individuals with pending bona fide U visa applications, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) recipients, and any other federally authorized noncitizen residing in a U.S. state or territory. This broadens the scope of individuals who can access benefits beyond previous definitions.
Section 2(j)(2)
Restoration of Premium Tax Credit for Certain Lawfully Present Noncitizens
This provision amends the Internal Revenue Code to restore and create a special rule for the premium tax credit for certain lawfully present noncitizens. Specifically, it allows noncitizens who are lawfully present, have household incomes not exceeding 100 percent of the poverty line, and are ineligible for Medicaid due to their immigration status (under criteria in effect on December 26, 2020) to be treated as if their income is 100 percent of the poverty line for premium tax credit purposes. This effectively makes them eligible for significant subsidies to purchase health insurance through the Affordable Care Act marketplaces, addressing a 'coverage gap' for this specific group.
The effective date for the amendments made by this Act is the date of enactment, but the application to services furnished begins 180 days after federal agency guidance is issued pursuant to subsection (k).
Section 2(l)
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice to allow agencies time to develop and issue necessary guidance for complex policy changes. It ensures a smooth transition rather than immediate, potentially chaotic, implementation.
Case for: Supporters argue that this phased effective date is practical and necessary to allow federal agencies sufficient time to develop and disseminate clear guidance, update systems, and train staff. This prevents confusion and ensures that the expanded benefits are implemented correctly and efficiently, avoiding disruptions for both beneficiaries and administrators.
Case against: Critics might argue that delaying the actual provision of services until 180 days after guidance is issued could prolong the hardship for eligible noncitizens who are in immediate need of benefits. They might contend that this timeline could be exploited to slow down implementation, or that the guidance issuance itself could be subject to political delays.
Estimated impact: This provision delays the actual receipt of benefits for eligible noncitizens by at least 180 days after guidance is issued, which itself could take up to 180 days from enactment, potentially pushing the full implementation nearly a year after the bill becomes law.
Expands the definition of 'qualified noncitizen' to include 'any other person who is not a citizen of the United States but who resides in a State or territory of the United States and is federally authorized to be present in the United States.'
Section 2(d)(2)(F)
Why it matters:This phrasing is likely intended to provide flexibility and ensure that no category of lawfully present noncitizens is inadvertently excluded from benefit eligibility, rather than being intentionally obscured. It acts as a comprehensive safety net for other federally authorized statuses.
Case for: Proponents argue that this broad language ensures that all individuals who are lawfully authorized to be present in the United States, regardless of the specific visa or status, are eligible for essential public benefits. They contend it prevents future gaps in coverage and ensures a consistent approach to supporting all residents who are legally permitted to reside in the country.
Case against: Opponents might argue that this broad language is overly expansive and could unintentionally extend benefits to categories of noncitizens not explicitly considered during legislative debate, leading to unforeseen fiscal costs and administrative challenges. They may prefer more specific, enumerated categories to maintain tighter control over eligibility.
Estimated impact: This provision has a potentially very broad impact, as it could encompass numerous existing and future categories of federally authorized presence, significantly expanding the pool of eligible individuals beyond those explicitly listed in other subparagraphs.