Debate Club

Is the Senate's Immigration Deal a Good Plan? >

The Cost of the Senate's Immigration Plan Is Significant

The cost of the Senate's immigration plan to the U.S. taxpayer would be significant

January 29, 2013

About Rosemary Jenks:

Rosemary Jenks is director of government relations at NumbersUSA.

The Senate's proposal looks a lot like the failed 2007 bill in that it would privatize the profits among a few groups and socialize the losses by dispersing the costs among the public at large. Illegal aliens would get work permits and a path to citizenship, owners of capital would get a permanent increase in workers to keep labor costs down, and pro-amnesty politicians would get a victory. For these groups, the proposal looks very good.

The cost to the American taxpayer, however, would be significant. A legalization for millions of less-affluent illegal aliens could cost U.S. taxpayers $30 billion a year in premium healthcare credits alone. Immigrants and illegal aliens are much more likely to live in poverty than U.S.-born citizens and thus more likely to rely on government assistance programs. The Senate's proposal includes a fast-track amnesty for illegal agriculture workers who are among the poorest workers in the country. The cost of supporting them will be passed on to the taxpayers.

[See a collection of political cartoons on immigration.]

Moreover, the Senate proposal would not stop future illegal immigration. The Senate proposal prioritizes legalization for those who have abused our immigration laws over mandatory E-Verify to protect the citizens and legal immigrant workers harmed by those abuses. Mandatory E-Verify is not even included as a necessary benchmark to trigger the "path to citizenship" for the amnestied 11 million. In fact the language in the outline suggests that the Senate might scrap E-Verify altogether and start over to "develop" a brand new system.

American taxpayers have been promised mandatory workplace enforcement since the first mass amnesty bill in 1986. Those promises were never kept as anti-enforcement groups successfully lobbied against them. The American Civil Liberties Union has already stated its opposition to even the weak workplace enforcement measures contained in the Senate proposal. As in 2007, the authors appear to have no commitment to ending future flows of illegal labor.

[Read the U.S. News debate on building a fence on the U.S.-Mexican border.]

The Senate proposal would expand, not reform, our failed immigration system. Corporate CEOs would enjoy a labor market perpetually in their favor and their shareholders may profit. But the rest of America would be left to pick up the tab.

Tags:
Congress,
immigration reform

Reader Comments ()

About Debate Club

A meeting of the sharpest minds on the day's most important topics, Debate Club brings in the best arguments and lets readers decide which is the most persuasive. Read the arguments, then vote. And be sure to check back often to see who has gotten the most support—and also to see what's being discussed now in the Debate Club.

Have ideas about what the Club should be debating? E-mail it to dclub@usnews.com.

You can also join the debate on Facebook or follow Debate Club on Twitter.

Advertisement
Cartoons
Thomas Jefferson Street Blog
President Obama's Code Pink Heckler Medea Benjamin Was Plain Rude

It's become acceptable for people to interrupt the president while he is delivering a formal speech on a deadly serious topic.

Obama Commerce Nominee Penny Pritzker’s Tax Problem

Obama’s Commerce Department nominee has some Romney-esque tax issues.

Oklahoma Tornado Reminds Us of the Value of Teachers

The Oklahoma tornado reminds us of all the roles teachers take on.

IRS, AP and James Rosen Scandals Strike at the First Amendment

The Obama scandals paint a picture of an administration at odds with the First Amendment.

Anthony Weiner Is Too Liberal to Be New York City Mayor

New York City doesn't need another Democratic mayor.

Organizations Masquerading as Tax-Exempt is the Real IRS Scandal

The real scandal at the IRS is electioneering groups getting tax-exempt status.

E.W. Jackson Proves the Tea Party Learned Nothing

By nominating E.W. Jackson, Virginia Republicans hope extremism will save them.

IRS, AP and Benghazi Are Not Obama Scandals

The word "scandal" doesn't appropriately describe anything going on in Washington these days.

Advertisement