Do you support or oppose the Trump admin’s move to expand the “public charge” test for immigrants?

Support (48%) – "Yes, I wholeheartedly support it. That's how it was when I came to the States and that's how it should be. You can't just have people come here to drain our resources and feast of the fruits of our labor. We all need to do our part to keep this country great."

• "Taxpayer funds are ultimately limited and I feel they should first be spent on current citizens. Until we can better deal with hunger and homelessness for people already here we should slow down on trying to help everyone else. Watering down those tax dollars doesn't really help anyone."

"Other countries have similar rules for immigrants. You must be financially self-sufficient to live there long-term and maybe eventually apply for citizenship. Otherwise, it’s kind of like stealing from citizens who already pay taxes. Politically, I am all for fairness and equality. I think everyone who needs help should get it. But, not to the detriment of another. Americans pay into the programs that help the public, so Americans should be prioritized to receive those benefits."

• "Without sufficient protections, US welfare systems become a taxpayer funded spigot available to the whole world. This is a perfectly valid approach to ensure our institutions remain sustainable."

"One of the benefits of being a citizen in a country as large as the US is that when you need assistance, there are various institutions, resources, and avenues to help get you back on your feet. Taking into consideration we aren't able to support all of the US citizens that need help, I don't think it's unreasonable to take all of those factors into consideration if we think non-Americans are going to be draining our resources without contributing in a meaningful way. We cannot continue to be a country of charity to any foreign person who wakes up and decides they want to be in the US. We have to take care of our own."

Oppose (40%) – "Just because a person fits into a certain category doesn't mean they're going to rely on public support. And even if they do, it's likely to be temporary. Most immigrants come to America to work or open businesses."

• "It will be used as an excuse to be discriminatory under the law. We spend more than double on the military as it costs to support people here legally trying to build a new life."

"Would this also apply to refugees? We are good friends with a family who came here legally from Ukraine. They were on assistance when they first arrived but able to find work, enroll in school and college and are now self sufficient. Coming to US was not a choice that they were planning for but a decision they made immediately when their city of Kiav was bombed in the middle of the night. I think that if there are going to be policies like this, there has to be exceptions."

• "I believe each.case is unique. People might need need temporary assistance, but they should not be judged because of it."

Unsure/other (12%) – "While I agree we need to be careful not to just let people in who drain our support systems, I also feel we should not shut the door because of limited means. I believe we would be losing out on many people that could make our society a better place. If a person can contribute to society, but may need support while they get settled in, I believe we should allow that. However, we need to know (or reasonably assume) that they can and will work and contribute. Maybe this looks like setting up work ahead of time; a program that could connect those looking for workers and those immigrating who have the skills (laborers as well) they are looking for."