Posted on 04/11/2005 5:25:04 PM PDT by fight_truth_decay
Analysis of the latest Census data indicates Texas’s illegal immigrant population is costing the state’s taxpayers more than $4.7 billion per year for education, medical care and incarceration. Even if the estimated tax contributions of illegal immigrant workers are subtracted, net outlays still amount to more than $3.7 billion per year. The annual fiscal burden amounts to about $725 per Texas household headed by a native-born resident.
This analysis looks specifically at the costs to the state for education, health care and incarceration resulting from illegal immigration. These three are the largest cost areas, and they are the same three areas analyzed in a 1994 study conducted by the Urban Institute, which provides a useful baseline for comparison ten years later. Other studies have been conducted in the interim, showing trends that support the conclusions of this report.
Other significant costs associated with illegal immigration exist, and these too should be taken into account by federal and state officials. Even without accounting for all of the numerous areas in which costs associated with illegal immigration are being incurred by Texas taxpayers, the program areas analyzed in this study indicate that the burden is substantial and that the costs are rapidly increasing.
The more than $4.7 billion in costs incurred by Texas taxpayers annually result from outlays in the following areas:
Education. Based on estimates of the illegal immigrant population in Texas and documented costs of K-12 schooling, Texans spend more than $4 billion annually on education for illegal immigrant children and for their U.S.-born siblings. About 11.9 percent of the K-12 public school students in Texas are children of illegal aliens.
Health Care. Taxpayer-funded medical outlays for health care provided to the state’s illegal alien population amount to about $520 million a year.
Incarceration. The uncompensated cost of incarcerating illegal aliens in Texas’s state and county prisons amounts to about $150 million a year (not including local jail detention costs or related law enforcement and judicial expenditures or the monetary costs of the crimes that led to their incarceration). State and local taxes paid by the unauthorized immigrant population go toward offsetting these costs, but they do not come near to matching the expenses. The total of such payments can generously be estimated at slightly less than $1 billion per year.
The fiscal costs of illegal immigration do not end with these three major cost areas. The total costs of illegal immigration to the state’s taxpayers would be considerably higher if other cost areas such as special English instruction, welfare programs used by the U.S.-born children of illegal aliens, or welfare benefits for American workers displaced by illegal alien workers were also calculated.
While the primary responsibility for combating illegal immigration rests with the federal government, there are many measures that state and local governments can take to combat the problem. Texans should not be expected to assume this already large and growing burden from illegal immigration simply because local businesses or other special interests benefit from being able to employ lower cost workers. The state could adopt measures to systematically collect information on illegal alien use of taxpayer-funded services and on where they are employed. Policies could then be pursued to hold employers financially accountable.
The state could also enter into a cooperative agreement with the federal government for training local law enforcement personnel in immigration law so illegal immigrants apprehended for breaking the law can be expeditiously turned over to the immigration authorities for removal from the country. Similarly, local officials who have adopted “sanctuary” measures that shield illegal aliens from being reported to the immigration authorities should be urged to repeal them.
Texas has also voluntarily adopted policies that add to the cost burdens of illegal immigration. While all states are compelled under a 1982 U.S. Supreme Court decision to provide a free K-12 education to all children, irrespective of their immigration status, they are under no obligation to subsidize education beyond that point. Nevertheless, the Texas legislature and Governor Perry have decided to grant in-state tuition benefits at public colleges and universities to illegal aliens.
It is unreasonable for a state to expect federal assistance to compensate for the fiscal burden of illegal immigration if it is pursuing policies that encourage illegal aliens to come and remain in the state.
The full report is available in html and pdf
April 2005
Several senators have threatened to attach amnesty and other immigration liberalizing amendments to the emergency war supplemental bill being considered by the Senate this week.-AgJOBS Amnesty and other Liberalizing Immigration Provisions
FAIR Legislative Update April 11, 2005, Debate on the bill begins TODAY.
No surprise here. What is sort of a surprise is how bad the state GOP and its two US Senators are on the issue.
What the author of this article fails to understand, or deceptively fails to reveal, is that states are prohibited by the US Constitution from making distinctions based on ones immigration status. Therefore, if someone is a resident of Texas, they are to be allowed to pay in state tuition.
More distortions by FAIR. Why do they fail to include the economic benefit these people provide? They should at least include the value of their labor and what they contribute to Texas GDP. FAIR will never forward its agenda using UNfair and deceptive tactics.
Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) is considering offering an amendment to lift the cap on H-2B seasonal "unskilled" guestworkers. These foreign workers are often hired to fill jobs also sought after by American teens, including hotel resort work and other summer vacation related employment. The cap is currently set at 66,000 visas per year.
Another potential amendment includes the DREAM Act which would provide certain illegal aliens with amnesty and reduced in-state college tuition benefits.
Senators John McCain (R-AZ) and Edward Kennedy (D-MA) may offer a guestworker/amnesty amendment that is far more sweeping than President Bush's guestworker/amnesty proposal.
http://capwiz.com/fair/issues/alert/?alertid=7384506&type=ta
"What the author of this article fails to understand, or deceptively fails to reveal, is that states are prohibited by the US Constitution from making distinctions based on ones immigration status. Therefore, if someone is a resident of Texas, they are to be allowed to pay in state tuition."
Mind pointing our the lyrics, line and verse, from the Constitution Song, for that claim of yours?
i got accepted to a university a month ago.
guess what? i got classified as out-of-state.
guess who gets in-state tuition? among residents, the children of illegals.
it's ironic that i grew up on a farm, hoeing beets and beans with migrants. their kids get in-state tuition, but i get out-of-state tuition. very few americans do field work.
another irony is that my natural mother's 3/4 indian. but i'm not affiliated with a tribe because i'm adopted and cannot prove myself. i look italian.
life in the united states of america.
Where in the US Constitution does it say anything that pertains to requiring Texas to provide education to illegal aliens (or to any child, for that matter) ?
The US Constitution is silent on education, which means it's up to the states.
The employers of the illegal aliens need to pay for the education of the children whose parents they have hired. Since the employer is the only one who benefits, they need to pay the cost for these children rather than sticking the taxpayer with it.
Don't mind CBG--he musta accidentally got a copy of the "Living Constitution." Those get misfiled in bookstores all the time.
"Policies could then be pursued to hold employers financially accountable. "
When illegal workers are found at a business the employer should be fined considerably, or seize business assets.
We don't need those kind of employers competing with legal, tax paying, fair wage paying employers. So if they are put out of business...... that is the consequence for hiring illegal immigrants!
We must take away the financial incentives that make hiring illegals so lucrative.
And stop the nonsense of issuing drivers licenses to illegals. Any government official that supports illegal immigrants is guilty of subversion and should be forcefully removed from office. There are no longer any reasonable excuses to support illegal immigrants.
I propose a possible solution to the problem of illegal immigration it's simple:
Make a law which requires all businesses to pay unskilled illegal immigrants the same paycheck as trained American citizens.
That way the businesses lose all incentive to hire them. The next step is to spread the word across the borders so that the immigrants will not make the mistake of becoming impoverished in US territories.
Of course the real challenge would be to convince business owners to support such a bill. But that's an ethical problem.
A 1996 federal law addressing illegal immigration included a provision affecting state residency requirements for in-state tuition rates, traditionally a matter of state law. Now, states are prohibited from offering in-state tuition rates to unauthorized immigrant students unless other U.S. citizens are eligible for the same rate. Since 2001, more than 20 states have introduced bills addressing in-state tuition for undocumented immigrants. Seven states have established new residency standards allowing unauthorized immigrant students to receive in-state tuition under certain conditions. Students without legal immigrant status continue to be ineligible for federal financial aid, although states are required to provide K-12 public education as a result of a 1982 Supreme Court decision.
Lawmakers watching Kansas tuition lawsuit
BY KEVIN O'HANLON / The Associated Press
With a legislative proposal pending to allow children of illegal immigrants to pay in-state tuition while attending Nebraska's public colleges, lawmakers are watching a federal lawsuit challenging a similar law in Kansas.
The lawsuit was filed last year in U.S. District Court in Topeka after the Kansas law was passed. It was filed on behalf of the Federation for American Immigration Reform and 24 university students who allege the tuition policy violates federal law, the U.S. Constitution and rewards illegal immigrants for being in the United States illegally. More Session 2005 stories
"It is the intent of Congress, as well as a compelling government interest, to remove the incentive for illegal immigration provided by the availability of public benefits," the lawsuit says. "It is a national policy that aliens within the nation's borders do not depend on public resources to meet their needs and that the availability of public benefits should not constitute an incentive for immigration to the United States."
The Nebraska measure (LB239) was introduced by Sen. Diane Schimek of Lincoln.
She said while there is a chance the Kansas lawsuit could adversely affect her bill, Schimek noted that eight states have passed such laws without objection from the federal government.
"I don't think the federal government thinks there's a problem with states doing this," she said. "I think you can make a very compelling argument that it's up to the states" and is not a federal issue.
Schimek's proposal has won the support of the University of Nebraska Board of Regents.
The bill would require illegal immigrants to be pursuing or promise to pursue legal status in order to take advantage of in-state tuition.
Supporters of the measure say the students who would be helped by the bill didn't choose to enter the country illegally and shouldn't be punished.
The Kansas lawsuit, which is scheduled for a hearing April 25, was filed last year by conservative Republican Kris Kobach, who lost his bid for a congressional seat in November.
Others also have criticized the Kansas law.
Kansas state Sen. Phil Journey, R-Haysville, has said the law is "an unfair burden on taxpayers to support illegal status."
Kansas Attorney General Phill Kline has distanced himself from the defense of the law. Kline said earlier that his office's civil litigation division will handle the state's defense in a federal lawsuit. He said its attorneys will report to Dave Davies, deputy attorney general for civil litigation, instead of Kline.
Kline said he is concerned efforts granting such in-state tuition will diminish the value of legal immigration. He also said a state-by-state approach to immigration issues is ill-advised.
Schimek's bill has not been designated a priority measure by any lawmaker, meaning it is unlikely to advance out of the Education Committee or be debated on the floor this session.
If it does not get killed by the committee, it would be eligible for debate next year.
Schimek said she will likely prioritize the measure next year.
"I want to prioritize this bill in the worst way," she said.
The employers of of illegal aliens should be prosecuted.
Article 1 section 8.
Sort of like the depressing the wages of unskilled labor in the area where they are prevalent. Illegals depress GDP all the way around. There is no benefit.
republicans will do nothing in the respect and dims want the
illegals to give benefits to so they can get votes.
look for nothing to be done in America's favor any time soon.
I don't think the matter of PROVIDING an education is at issue. It's whether a state can discriminate based on one's immigration status that is at issue. Clearly, a state may not. See article 1 section 8.
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.