Posted on 04/25/2013 6:51:12 AM PDT by IbJensen
Our nation is going broke, and now is not the time to increase burdens on American families.
The Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act (S. 744)—commonly called the “Gang of Eight bill” after the eight Senators who came up with it, Charles Schumer (D-NY), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Robert Menendez (D-NJ), Michael Bennet (D-CO), John McCain (R-AZ), Jeff Flake (R-AZ), Marco Rubio (R-FL), and Lindsey Graham (R-SC)—includes amnesty for some 11 million unlawful immigrants. That amnesty would further burden taxpayers and weaken our fiscal situation. Congress should not rush to pass the bill without understanding the cost to the American taxpayer, especially when key research identifying and calculating those costs is nearly complete.
We have more than $12 trillion in public debt and tens of trillions of dollars more in unfunded obligations that we have no way to afford, thanks to promises made by past and present politicians. With this in mind, today’s political leaders must consider the fiscal impact of amnesty and a path to citizenship that would enable millions of unlawful immigrants to qualify for costly welfare and entitlement programs.
Simply put, what would this cost taxpayers, present and future? Would this make their burdens lighter, or double down on debt and unaffordable promises to be repaid by future generations?
Leaders from both parties have repeatedly failed to consider properly the long-term effects of their policies. That is why we are in such a predicament. For too many politicians, long-term thinking extends only to the next election, at most six years away. Unfortunately, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the legislative branch’s official scorekeeper, does not help much in this regard, as it often looks at costs for only the next 10 years.
We’ve seen legislative myopia again and again as politicians put off tough choices for the future or make our fiscal picture worse with new and expanded government programs we cannot afford, like Medicare prescription drug benefits or Obamacare. The biggest losers are future generations.
Former House Majority Leader Dick Armey (R-TX) once noted that three groups spend other people’s money: thieves, children, and politicians—and all three need supervision. Robert Rector of The Heritage Foundation helps provide the information needed for the American people to keep watch over politicians playing with immigration laws and our tax money. Rector is most famous for his work pioneering welfare reform and enjoys a sterling reputation as one of the nation’s leading authorities on government social programs.
When he last crunched the numbers during the 2007 amnesty debate, Rector calculated that a general amnesty would cost some $2.5 trillion after considering what legalized immigrants would likely pay in taxes and receive in government assistance. With government only getting bigger (again, see Obamacare), it is likely he will calculate an even higher price tag in 2013. His highly anticipated research is nearing completion. His research from five years ago and the anticipated update are a central part of the debate.
Some amnesty proponents are trying to convince themselves that the immigration bill won’t cost much. On the surface, they have some good talking points, noting that “registered provisional immigrants” (the name given to aliens who entered or stayed in the U.S. unlawfully but would get amnesty under the bill) are not eligible for government benefits. Of course that would last only until, at the very latest, they become citizens. (More likely, there will be pressure in future years to speed up both citizenship and eligibility.)
In just a short time, they would be entitled to the same massive array of government programs as everyone else, including expensive retirement income and health programs that are already severely underfunded. The average unlawful immigrant has a 10th grade education, and low-skill immigrants on average take more in government benefits than they pay in taxes at every stage of their lives.
America’s families are already burdened with taxes to support a bloated welfare and overburdened entitlement system that is badly in need of reform. This situation would get far worse under amnesty.
If every member of the ‘gang of eight’ PERSONALLY takes in twenty third world people to LIVE IN THEIR HOMES... at their expense - then I’ll consider that they’re desire to ‘share the wealth’ is real.
Politicians will swear these people are coming here to work or get away from their repressive regimes. Truth is, they are coming here for the perks. EBT, section 8, medicaid, etc, while hardworking Americans pay for them to sit and do nothing, or kill us with acts of terrorism.
We just paid for a lavish lifestyle for two muslim terrorists. While these people are using our rights and laws against us, we are losing more money and freedoms.
Agreed. This amnesty is nuts. I’d rather pay to ship the arses back to where they came from, one busload at a time.
A few people are arguing that this amnesty must be fine, because Grover Norquist/ATR ‘cares’ about the taxpayer....this article is proof that is just NOT so!
See also:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3012061/posts
Abdurahman Alamoudi, the Boston bombers, Grover Norquist, and the GOP
Michelle Malkin.com ^ | April 24, 2013 12:54 PM | Michelle Malkin
Agreed!
Further, wrt the following in the article: “Some amnesty proponents are trying to convince themselves that the immigration bill won’t cost much. On the surface, they have some good talking points, noting that “registered provisional immigrants” (the name given to aliens who entered or stayed in the U.S. unlawfully but would get amnesty under the bill) are not eligible for government benefits. Of course that would last only until, at the very latest, they become citizens. (More likely, there will be pressure in future years to speed up both citizenship and eligibility.)
In just a short time, they would be entitled to the same massive array of government programs as everyone else, including expensive retirement income and health programs that are already severely underfunded. The average unlawful immigrant has a 10th grade education, and low-skill immigrants on average take more in government benefits than they pay in taxes at every stage of their lives.”
I haven’t seen anything regarding the children of these undocumented Democrats that have been and/or will be born in the US. The current law makes them American citizens, which makes them eligible for all of the benefits. So, while the illegal aliens might not be elgible for benefits right away, their kids would be.
I saw way to much when I cwas a cashier at a major chain. These people would come in and have a cart load. The woman would have 3 children running around (usually 2 still in diapers), pregnant with another and her husband/boyfriend behind her. I would ring up charcoal, steaks, candy, pop, ships, and more junk food. She would pay with her EBT. Then we would go to WIC. They would have 4-5 tickets for vegetables (usually veggies kids won’t eat but the parents would) and formula (the formula would be $89.00 alone).
Then the husband/boyfriends would step in behind and have clothes, toys and games on the conveyor. They would then pull a wad of fifty and hundred dollar bills out of their pockets to pay.
I’m standing there, a taxpayer on my feet for eight hours having to see this and hold back the urge to scream and strike out at them. This happened everyday more times than I can count, especially the first of each month. That’s our Gov.
Glenn Beck ( A longtime friend of Jeff Flake) Just savaged Jeff Flake on his show over this....
My eyes were actually welling up with tears as Glenn, Pat and Stu intellectually tore him apart. Partly because I was Proud of Glenn for taking a stand, but also because Jeff Flake just proved he has lost his soul to Washinton...
Agree with mardi. I, too, have seen such things while working as cashier years ago. I’m sure it’s only worse now. I have had friends in the public sector tell me the same thing now. Mexican women with EBT amounts of $4,000-$5,000 left on their cards AFTER buying groceries. The balances carry over from one month to another. I would hope they aren’t getting that much each month! But the thing is....if they can carry a balance of that amount, WHY should they need EBT’s? Stories about “buying” groceries with EBT’s and like mardi said, pulling out $50’s and $100’s for brand name items..clothes, shoes, deteregent, cell phones, driving new vehicles, etc. I have also heard from others about the women that are here “legally” and working at some of the local factories. They have 4-5 kids, and “undocumented” boyfriends or husbands that are paid “under the table” for working. These women would file tax returns and get “unearned” income credits (sometimes amounting to refunds of $8,000 +) for their kids....and then b*itch because it meant they would lose their food stamps for a few months until they could get rid of the money. If it was only one or two times I heard things like this, I “might” chalk it up to gossip or rumors, or _racist_ remarks /s, but after hearing it from numeruous people in different areas and situations....well...as my old granny would have said....”where’s the smoke, there’s fire”.
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.