In effect the total under21year population could decrease leaving the AFDC group constant. thereby raising the ratio. To restore the ratio to that established in January 1. 1967. the number of children for which the State can receive Federal funds must be reduced. This could effect States subject to emigration--States which may already suffer from high unemployment and social welfare problems. Affect. as it might. States from which people are migrating. the results of this "freezing" formula can be devastating for States into which these families are immigrating. The probability is high that families migrating because of impoverished conditions will include potential AFDC recipients due to desertion of a parent. Their migration would lower the ratio for the State they leave. assuming other factors constant. but will increase the ratio for the State in which they settle. For example. assuming the number of AFDC recipients whose parent has deserted is smaller than the total under21 population. a subsequent immigration of families with children in this particular AFDC category. both categoriesAFDC and total population under 21 years oldwill increase. but the resulting ratio will exceed that established in 1967. The State will be ineligible for Federal assistance for some of the children. What control does a State have over the immigration and emigration and the resulting increases or decreases in its population? Notwithstanding the moral implications. what legal jurisdiction does a State to which a family -has immigrated. have over a parent who. for whatever reason. refuses to join his family? Moreover. in many cases certain groups of people have migrated out of specific States because of the social policies under which they were forced to live. The fact of the matter is that certain other States have received those who have migrated.
Keywords matched
immigrated emigration immigration immigrating