Posted on 09/30/2010 1:39:17 PM PDT by jazusamo
(CNSNews.com) -- News Corporation CEO Rupert Murdoch said he supports amnesty for “law abiding” illegal immigrants because as legal residents they can help the nation’s economy by adding to “our tax base.” He also said he supports securing the border to prevent more illegal immigrants from entering the United States.
At a hearing on Thursday before the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law, Murdoch testified, “I joined Mayor [Michael] Bloomberg in organizing the Partnership for a New American Economy because I believe that all Americans should have a vital interest in fixing our broken immigration system so we can continue to compete in the 21st century global economy.”
“While supporting complete and proper closure of all our borders to future illegal immigrants, our partnership advocates reform that gives a path to citizenship for responsible, law-abiding immigrants who are in the U.S. today without proper authority,” said Murdoch, who was born in Australia and is a naturalized U.S. citizen.
The News Corp. CEO, whose company owns the Fox News Channel, further said it is fiscally unfeasible to deport the illegal immigrants who are already in the United States, which he estimated as totaling about 12 million people.
“It is nonsense to talk of expelling 12 million people,” testified Murdoch. “Not only is it impractical, it is cost prohibitive.”
Murdoch cited a study that gauged “the price of mass deportation at $285 billion over five years,” which amounts to $57 billion per year, adding that “there are better ways to spend our money.”
“A full path to legalization – requiring unauthorized immigrants to register, undergo a security check, pay taxes and learn English – would bring these immigrants out of a shadow economy and add to our tax base,” said Murdoch.
He continued, “According to one study, a path to legalization would contribute an estimated $1.5 trillion to the Gross Domestic Product over 10 years.”
Murdoch did not cite the source for the studies he cited during his testimony.
Regarding border security, Murdoch said “we need to do more” than spend money on resources to secure our borders.
“We can and should add more people, technology and resources to ensure that we have control over who comes into this country,” said the CEO, “but I worry that spending alone will not stop the flow of illegal immigrants.”
He claimed that while the United States has increased border security funding every year since 1992, “the estimated population of illegal immigrants has more than tripled.”
“That number only started to decline when our country hit a recession and there were fewer jobs,” said Murdoch. “So, our border security must also be matched with efforts to make sure employers can’t hire illegal immigrants.”
Both Murdoch and New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg testified about the role of immigration in strengthening America’s economy.
“Our system of immigration, I think it fair to say, is broken,” said Bloomberg before the subcommittee. “I think it’s undermining our economy, it is slowing our recovery, and it really is hurting millions of Americans. And we just have to fix it.”
“Creating a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants will strengthen our economy,” said Bloomberg.
Bloomberg also said that his and Murdoch’s experience with the issue stems from having hired thousands of people over the years.
In contrast to what Murdoch and Bloomberg said before the subcommittee, Steven Camarota, director of research at the Center for Immigration Studies, testified that the economic losses caused by illegal immigrants outweighed the benefits.
He pointed out that the National Academy of Sciences has examined the fiscal impact of immigration.
“They found that the fiscal impact was enough to eat up the entire economic gain,” said Camarota. “So if you put the economic gain with the fiscal impact, you get no benefits at all, it would seem.”
Camarota also testified that illegal immigrants take jobs from Americans while also lowering wages. He said that the wage loss is 12 times bigger than the benefits.
i support a 6 months amnesty for all the ILLEGALS to leave. After that they are rounded up.
Also, make it necessary for someone to be their financial sponsor until they take their citizenship test.
Rupert, I’m moving into your house tomorrow. I only need about 1000 square feet. You, of course, are expected to provide food, utilities, education for all my kids, the 1000 square feet rent free, college education for any who want it, medical care, cash benefits, etc.
BTW, 10 of my friends are coming next week. We’ll be having loud parties, driving without insurance or license, and we don’t speak your language so we’ll need you to provide interpreters wherever we go.
I’m sure you’ll be glad to see us, you f’n MORON.
i think that’s the point of agreeing with the statement.
Get lost Murdoch.
BTTT
I just read the other day how Gingrich has been part of the CFR since 1990, four years before he tricked everyone into thinking that things would change. Let’s hope we’re not tricked this time and/or that we hold them accountable.
It seems almost no politician can get high up in the food chain without endorsing amnesty, whatever they call it, however they spin it. These traitors have zero respect for our sovereignty, zero understanding of what we the peasants are dealing with, some on a daily basis.
I’ve never heard such defeatist attitudes (waaa, waaa, we can’t kick them out) as I do from these globalist types, and it sickens me.
So many different things could be meant by “amnesty” that two people with quite opposed plans can both claim they are either for it or against it.
I wouldn’t want any program which gives any more of a leg up to those who sneaked into this country than those who have not sneaked into this country. If in a good mood, I’d offer an alternative option of permanent residency without any possibility of getting on a citizenship track. You sneaked in, you want to be a citizen, then you should get out of here for five years before starting the process. Oh, and you must never have committed any serious criminal acts.
We need something in our Constitution that prohibits funny little foreign people like Murdoch from opening their mouths regarding our national politics.
If he were a Mexcan citizen and said that, he'd be on the first smokin'plane back to Austrillia.
“Rupert Murdoch Calls for Amnesty for ‘Law-Abiding’ Illegal Immigrants”
An oxymoron. Is Murdoch that stupid?
Remember that Rupert Murdoch was himself an illegal immigrant who received amnesty, as do numerous people do every business day of the year.
It is ignorance to think that amnesty is something in the future to be blocked. Ever since the designation of such a thing as an illegal immigrant was created in the last half of our country’s existence, there has been amnesty.
What is under discussion is changing the rules for amnesty that already exists.
There’s no such thing as a law abiding “illegal” immigrant! It’s an oxymoron!
I happen to agree with Murdoch too.
If they come here for similar reasons as to what my parents did and found the government stood for years & decades in their way...?
Sorry, if they are here and want to work...are more or less law-abiding shy ...one immigration quota... yeah...they can stay.
Provided we send one of our own generational welfare recipients back in their place.
Rupert is a business man. He may not benefit directly from illegal labor but he probably knows a lot of big name CEOs of labor intensive companies who do. He’s just helping his own kind and screw the little people. When they are willing to work for a Mexican’s wages he’ll care about them.
What is the expense involved in causing deportation?
If business AND INDIVIDUALS can not hire illegals, you have deportation by attrition.
What about the illegal housekeeper, gardener, etc., who bore and raised children here, perhaps graduated from college by now becoming taxpayers? Any mercy there?
There is no such thing as a law-abiding; illegal alien.
lol
well then I guess he is calling for them all to be deported since they are all law breakers.
I've little doubt you're correct. Him taking this stand is little different than Hollywood elites saying the same thing and I pay them no heed whatsoever.
It's WAY cheaper than the cost they are burdening taxpayers with now, and the idea that it's "impossible" to round up 20 million illegals and ship them out is bullshit.
You broke the law and entered our home, and we will throw your asses out, period.
I don't care how many businesses who survive using them are driven bankrupt, and how much money they have been donating to have politicians look the other way; they should be booted out and those that hired them, jailed.
FOLLOW THE MONEY.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.