Posted on 05/20/2007 2:34:13 AM PDT by dennisw
AMNESTY $$$$$ [Kate O'Beirne]
Tomorrow, The Heritage Foundation's Robert Rector will share the following analysis in testimony before the House Judiciary Committee. Virtually no attention has been paid to the enormous costs involved in legalizing millions of low-skilled illegal aliens. One problem is that immigration reform is being negotiated by Judiciary Committee lawyers who typically have little experience in budgetary issues. Some Members who might be expected to blanch at a potential price tag of $2.5 trillion on their handiwork are kidding themselves by naively expecting that government benefits will be denied to the newly-legalized. Some know so little about tax burdens and benefit costs that they wrongly believe low-skilled workers are a net benefit to the social security system.
Giving amnesty to illegal immigrants would increase the costs outlined in this testimony. Some 50 to 60 percent of illegal immigrants lack a high school degree. Granting amnesty or conditional amnesty to illegal immigrants would, overtime, increase their use of means-tested welfare, Social Security and Medicare. Fiscal costs would go up significantly in the short term but would go up dramatically after the amnesty recipient reached retirement. Based on my current research, I estimate that if all the current adult illegal immigrants in the U.S. were granted amnesty the net retirement costs to government (benefits minus taxes) could be over $2.5 trillion.
The calculation of this figure is as follows. In March 2006, there were 9.3 million adult illegal immigrants in the U.S. Most illegal immigrants are low-skill. On average, each elderly low-skill immigrant creates a net cost (benefits minus taxes) for the taxpayer of about $17,000 per year. (This includes federal state and local government costs.) If the government gave amnesty to 9.3 million illegal immigrants, most of them would eventually become eligible for Social Security and Medicare benefits or Supplemental Security Income and Medicaid benefits.
However, not all of the 9.3 million adults given amnesty would survive till age 67. Normal mortality rates would probably reduce the population by roughly 15 percent before age 67. That would mean 7.9 million individuals would reach 67 and enter retirement.
Of those reaching 67, the average life expectancy would be around 18 years. The net governmental cost (benefits minus taxes) of these elderly individuals would be around $17,000 per year. Over eighteen years of expected life, costs would equal $360,000 per elderly amnesty recipient. A cost of $306,000 per amnesty recipient times 7.9 million amnesty recipients would be $2.4 trillion. These costs would hit the U.S. taxpayer at exactly the point that the Social Security system is expected to go into crisis. This is a preliminary estimate based on my ongoing research. More research should be performed, but I believe policy makers should examine these potential costs carefully before rushing to grant amnesty, “Z visas” or “earned citizenship” to the current illegal immigrant population.
Amnesty proponents may argue that some of these individuals will go home without getting benefits, or before they reach retirement age. Though perhaps valid, that argument only emphasizes how expensive amnesty recipients would be; the longer they remain in the country the greater the cost to the taxpayer.
Little wonder that supporters of "comprehensive" immigration reform are racing against the clock. They best hurry up and pass this EXPENSIVE bill before taxpayers already opposed to amnesty realize what it's likely to cost them.
Listen here where Robert Rector says this amnesty will kill Social Security---->>>
http://marklevinfan.freepgs.com/Audio/RobertRector.wma
Listen here. Will come up in Windows media player. Can also download by "save target as"
http://marklevinfan.freepgs.com/Audio/RobertRector.wma
Surely you forgot to tag your post as “sarcasm”.
The illegals are destroying AMERICA!!!
And their accomplices are our politicians!!
Congratulations. You are truly a clueless product of our failed self-centered public miseducation system.
NAILED IT!
Every communist state has as its supporting base a large group of under class citizens who are incapable of integrating into society because of skills, education, or for cultural reasons. As you can witness of an given day, illegals do not intend to assimilate.
98% of them will always be low income earners. These are the people that are easily persuaded when the politicos play the envy card. All Hugo Chavez will have to do is get the new Russian AK's to them and you have an in-place army ready to fight for their "fair share."
I realize you understand this. I simply wanted to reiterate the point.
Our SS system is the worst investment anyone could make. Letting in anyone is a net benefit to the ponzi scheme. Using it to say that the participants benefit more than they contribute as compared to other investments they could make is a mathematical lie.
Retirement Communism should be killed before it bankrupts all of us. The borders should be sealed. Illegals should be deported. Politicians in opposition to any of the three should be tarred and feathered.
It will also kill everything else including our economy.
If you would care to see the results of the fruitation of this bill once it becomes law, look at Mexico and other Central and South American Countries, the muslim countries and what was once Yogoslovia.
These are a mirror of what the U.S. will be in from 10 to at the most, 20 years from now.
My race is about run, I won’t be around then. Vut I am now seeing the foundation being laid.
I believe that it will.
It is my opinion that both political parties, for different reasons, want this law the way it is. Also the people that own Congress[ not the voters] want it.
They knew in advance that it would cause a firestorm among the electorate. That is the reason for the secret neogations and the last second release of the results.
bttt
BTTT (OPI for the NE Ohio ping list)
Bill tried to shut him up by pretending that the interview was over with something like, "Now let's hear the other side or that's your opinion." Rector stopped Bill mid sentence (it was wonderful) and continued it's not an "opinion, it's a fact.")
O'Reilly is pretenting to be "anti-amnesty" then out of the other side of his mouth says things like, "70$ of the American people are against sending the illegal immigrants home."
Note to Bill: If you are against amnesty it doesn't matter one whit what the percentage of Americans can be conviced that illegals cost this country (them) tax payer dollars, it is wrong and unlawful. How many Americans think that speed limits are 'wrong?'" The law is still the law and when we ignore enforcement, we cheapen the law and make ALL Americans disregard it.
“For such a powerful lobbying group, I haven’t heard a word about what the AARP has to say.”
“The AARP is a liberal group - they don’t care if the illegals bankrupt the social security system — they’ll sell memberships and insurance to citizens and illegals alike. No skin off their nose.”
Every Liberal group is paid off by the pander-bear Democrats to tow the party line. All the liberal special interests will cheerlead this massive payoff to future Democrat voters - $2.4 trillion worth of it - just so long as they ‘get theirs’.
The losers? The Taxpaying Middle-Class.
The real travesty is how G W Bush has managed to sell out the GOP future by co-pandering with the Democrats, leaving the GOP base high and dry.
O’Reilly is too clever by half, he jumped the gun on this amnesty because he and his silly staffers didn’t read what’s in store. I too was fooled when I first heard Senator Kyl a few days ago. Everyone at National Review has figured this bill is 100% bait and switch scam. With instant Z VISA legalization for 12-20 million illegals and enforcement measures that will never kick in.
Robert Rector is a major truth teller on this scam. Listen to him here——> http://marklevinfan.freepgs.com/Audio/RobertRector.wma
Don’t expect us to pick up your baggage (or visit you in the nursing home.)
That’s cold!
In one of his first speeches after leaving the White House, Bill Clinton (at Georgetown U, IIRC) made a statement similar to this: ‘The US needs to play nice with 3rd world nations, as it will be one of them in a few decades.’
I thought that an unusual statement.
A few months later, Madeline Albright was giving a speech (IIRC, one of the island nations southeast of Florida). She made a remark that was very similiar — that America would decline into a 3rd world nation.
If we look at the governmental policies (public and overt) that have been pushed since Bush 1, there seems to be a consistent movement in the direction of globalism, erasing our borders, allowing the UN more influence in our governing, etc.
Anytime the topics of Council on Foreign Relations, TransHighway, NAU, SPP and globalism are brought up, the bot race out to cry “tinfoil alert” and claim these don’t even exist. Yet, a dozen states are working on legislation to stop or delay various Federal/administration provisions supporting those.
The next presidency seems to be taking on ominous importance. If we get another globalist open-borders president, our identity of a super nation may be facing its demise — from within, by our own politicians. That is why we must scrape all the facade off the wannabes and find out what is actually inside them. Bush2 claimed to be the ‘compassionate conservative’. His compassion is to the loyalists who support him, but not necessarily to the American citizenry. His conservatism is almost non-existent, as the president who has had the largest bugdets and more pork than any in history.
The 2008 election becomes vital to our survival as a strong nation. Bush2 hookwinked the voters into thinking he was the conservative the voters wanted. He wasn’t. So who, in the field of contenders is? Take off the blinders, don’t jump on the bandwagons just because they look good on TV, or are clean and articulate.
Which candidates will claim the conservative label and toss it out the window as soon as they step foot in the Oval Office?
My Social Security statement says I am required to earn 40 credits (max 4 per year with $940 earned income per credit). This meant I had to work 10 years to be eligible for SS benefits.
Does this apply to illegals, and how does this work for those who have paid into the system using fradulent SS numbers (you supposedly can’t work without one)? Right now they handle this as a cost of getting a job, and the Government has no interest in doing anything about it because it is helping fund the current system.
The article is right in that members of the Judiciary having no fiduiary sense with respect to Social Security.
Correct. And don't forget, these millions of illegals have already willingly broken Federal laws to get what they want. What Congress and the President are trying is criminally stupid.
“Social Security is already dead. As soon as me and the rest of generation X take over, it’s the first thing we’re killing.
Boomers are (largely) idiots with little/no financial foresight.
Don’t expect us to pick up your baggage (or visit you in the nursing home.)”
“But for the Grace of God, go I”, be careful what you wish for, it’s a humbling experience.
Signed,
a Gen Xer, now severely disabled, life savings & investments completely exhausted and who has no choice BUT to depend on Social Security Disability (which I contributed for 25 years to) as a matter of life or death.
This is going to be a disaster...
All I can say is that I'm really glad that I don't have any children.
Mark
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.