Clay Fuller (R-GA)
Securing Healthcare and Income Entitlements for Lawfully Domiciled Citizens (SHIELD Citizens) Act
A Republican bill with 6 Republican cosponsors · See all 6 cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committees on Energy and Commerce, Financial Services, Education and Workforce, and Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
The SHIELD Citizens Act intends to restrict eligibility for Federal welfare programs to United States citizens and nationals. It amends the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 to ensure noncitizens cannot access these resources. The bill defines "Federal welfare program" to include assistance for food, housing, medical, energy, and cash needs. Some exceptions remain for emergency medical treatment, disaster relief, and certain community services. Current noncitizen recipients would have a transition period of no more than 180 days after the Act takes effect.
Yes· 3 of 5
- Scored +5
Does this reduce what the federal government spends?
The bill explicitly removes noncitizens from multiple federal welfare programs, reducing total expenditures.
- Scored +3
Does this make the government pay for what it commits to?
The bill aims to limit public resource dependency to citizens, reflecting a policy of fiscal restriction.
- Scored +2
Does this tighten control of the border?
The bill intends to remove public benefit incentives for immigration, which may indirectly support border security goals.
The opposite· 3 of 20
- Scored -10
Would immigrants be better off under this?
The bill explicitly removes almost all federal welfare benefits for noncitizens.
- Scored -8
Is this likely to lift people out of poverty?
The bill removes essential food, cash, and housing assistance for a significant population of noncitizens.
- Scored -8
Does this make health care easier to get in general?
Noncitizens lose access to Medicaid and other federally funded medical assistance.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
- Restricting Resources to Citizens: The bill aims to ensure that Federal welfare programs are available only to citizens of the United States, which Congress finds prevents public benefits from being an incentive for immigration (Sec. 2).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Loss of Benefits for Noncitizens: Noncitizens will lose eligibility for various Federal welfare programs, including Medicaid, SNAP, Supplemental Security Income, and Federal housing assistance (Sec. 3 and Sec. 4).
- Limited Transition Period: Individuals who are qualified aliens lawfully receiving benefits before the effective date are only eligible to continue receiving those benefits for no more than 180 days (Sec. 5(b)).
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would middle-income households be better off under this? — Potential slight improvement in benefit availability for citizens by reducing the pool of recipients. Would immigrants be better off under this? — The bill explicitly removes almost all federal welfare benefits for noncitizens. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Low-income noncitizen households lose access to SNAP, Medicaid, and housing assistance. Would children be better off under this? — Noncitizen children lose access to WIC and other critical nutritional and medical support. Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this? — A significant number of Hispanic Americans are noncitizens who would lose critical benefits. Would people with disabilities be better off under this? — Noncitizens with disabilities lose access to SSI and Medicaid. Would people in middle age be better off under this? — Noncitizen adults lose access to various safety net programs. Would people over 65 be better off under this? — Noncitizen seniors lose access to SSI and other federally funded assistance. Would women be better off under this? — Noncitizen women lose access to WIC and other healthcare/family supports. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — Noncitizen young adults lose access to essential welfare and housing programs. Would Asian Americans be better off under this? — Noncitizen Asian Americans would lose access to federal welfare programs. Would retired people be better off under this? — Noncitizen retirees lose access to SSI.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this tighten control of the border? — The bill intends to remove public benefit incentives for immigration, which may indirectly support border security goals. Is this likely to lift people out of poverty? — The bill removes essential food, cash, and housing assistance for a significant population of noncitizens. Does this make housing cost less? — Noncitizens are explicitly barred from Federal housing assistance, including Section 8. Is this likely to reduce homelessness? — Removing noncitizens from federal housing assistance likely increases the risk of homelessness for that group. Does this make child care cost less? — Noncitizens lose access to WIC and other family assistance programs. Does this make it easier for immigrants already here to become citizens? — The bill creates a stronger incentive for citizenship by denying benefits to all other noncitizens. Does this expand the rights of people with disabilities? — Noncitizen individuals with disabilities lose access to Supplemental Security Income (SSI).
- Healthcare
- Does this make health care easier to get in general? — Noncitizens lose access to Medicaid and other federally funded medical assistance. Does this make mental health care easier to get? — Removing noncitizens from Medicaid and other welfare programs likely reduces their access to mental health services. Does this put more money into Medicaid, the health coverage for people on low incomes? — The bill removes noncitizens from Medicaid eligibility, which will reduce the number of beneficiaries.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this reduce what the federal government spends? — The bill explicitly removes noncitizens from multiple federal welfare programs, reducing total expenditures. Does this make the government pay for what it commits to? — The bill aims to limit public resource dependency to citizens, reflecting a policy of fiscal restriction. Does this reduce what the federal government owes? — By restricting welfare eligibility to citizens only, government spending on these programs is likely to decrease.
- 7/16/2026
- 4 Cosponsors added.
- 7/14/2026
- Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committees on Energy and Commerce, Financial Services, Education and Workforce, and Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in House
Rick AllenRepublican · Georgia
Jack BergmanRepublican · Michigan
Earl CarterRepublican · Georgia
Russell FryRepublican · South Carolina
Barry LoudermilkRepublican · Georgia
Richard McCormickRepublican · Georgia