# data[].attributes.body
reasons why such an amnesty would help the U.S. economy and would be better than failed efforts at enforcement.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
(CNSNews.com) - A report issued by the Immigration Policy Center (IPC), a liberal group, calls for a wide-ranging pathway to citizenship for the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants currently living in the United States. The report says such an amnesty program would help the struggling U.S. economy and would be better than failed efforts at enforcement.

A leading critic of across-the-board amnesty, however, said that real enforcement has not been practiced and that the costs of a sweeping amnesty far outweigh its benefits.

"Comprehensive immigration reform that includes a path to legalization for undocumented workers would pay for itself," the IPC report says, "in contrast to the failed and costly enforcement-only policies that have been pursued thus far."

The report further says that any amnesty program more than pays for itself - citing congressional proposals in 2006 and 2007 -- by raising more in tax revenue than it costs in increased bureaucracy. Both bills failed due to overwhelming opposition from conservatives over the plans' amnesty goals.

The report also states that illegals would earn higher wages as a result of amnesty and therefore increase their spending, adding to economic growth. They would also have greater incentive to improve their education and English proficiency, giving them added opportunity to earn more money, says the Immigration Policy Center.

But policies that focus strictly on enforcement will only push illegal immigrants further into what the IPC calls the underground economy, thereby decreasing tax revenue. Citing Congressional Budget Office data, the report says the E-Verify program - designed to electronically check immigration status - would have cost the government $17.3 billion in payroll tax revenue as workers sought employment off the books.

The report also condemned enforcement actions taken to date as having failed, citing the increase in the budgets of the Border Patrol, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and the Department of Homeland Security as evidence, claiming that despite the increased spending, illegal immigration has continued to rise.

"Enforcement-only policies are costly and ineffective," says the Immigration Policy Center. "At the same time that spending on immigration enforcement has skyrocketed, the number of undocumented immigrants in the United States has roughly tripled."

However, the report does not include the cost to taxpayers of the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants being added to the nation's social welfare programs - a figure the conservative Heritage Foundation, in its own study, found could be as high as $2.6 trillion. According to that study's author, Robert Rector, the cost of amnesty would far outweigh the modest benefits the country would see from 12 million new, low-skilled workers.

"If any reader believes that people who are high school dropouts pay more in taxes than they receive in government benefits, then they believe amnesty is good for the U.S. taxpayer," Rector told CNSNews.com.

About "50 to 60 percent of the illegals are, in fact, high school dropouts and another 30 to 40 percent have a foreign high school degree, which is very similar," said Rector.

"The reality is that that type of family - on average - receives about $20,000 a year more in benefits than they pay in taxes," he explained.

Rector said that any attempt to argue that amnesty was a benefit to U.S. citizens was "ludicrous." It is counter-factual to think that millions of poorly educated, poorly skilled workers are going to be a net gain for America, he said.

"What we have here is basically an attempt by the Left to argue that up is down and left is right," said Rector. "That this population, which is overwhelmingly very poorly educated, unlike every other poorly educated group in the United States, is somehow going to be a net financial contributor."

"It's ludicrous," he said.

Rector argued that since illegal immigrants essentially consume what they produce, there would be no net benefit to the economy from granting them amnesty.

"They make the pie bigger - the total GDP (Gross Domestic Product) bigger - but they consume the slice of the pie they create," he said. "No American citizen is better off as a result of that."

Rector also rejected the idea that enforcement had failed, saying it hadn't even been tried.
"If you don't enforce the law, it has no effect -- surprise, surprise," he said.

Rector also said that measures like the E-Verify system have not failed because they also have not been used, a fact he attributed to pro-amnesty groups' opposition to enforcement.

"There's no enforcement at all, we don't use the [existing enforcement] system," he said. "If you were to require the use of the system, they would scream bloody murder, not because it doesn't work, but because they know it works too well."

He said amnesty had been tried once before and that the current effort was simply more of the same.

"Twenty years ago we granted an amnesty, for one time," said Rector. "In exchange for that amnesty in 1986, we said, 'From here on in it will be unlawful to hire illegal aliens. From the moment that was passed, the interest groups got in there and ensured that that law has never been enforced."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Pro-Amnesty Group Says 'Pathway to Citizenship' Better than 'Failed' Enforcement

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
(CNSNews.com) - A report issued by the Immigration Policy Center (IPC), a liberal group, calls for a wide-ranging pathway to citizenship for the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants currently living in the United States. The report says such an amnesty program would help the struggling U.S.

# data[].attributes.body
An article supplying evidence for how immigration amnesty has economical bennefits

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Your usage has been flagged as a violation of our terms of service.

For inquiries related to this message please contact support. For sales inquiries, please visit http://www.bloomberg.com/professional/request-demo

If you believe this to be in error, please confirm below that you are not a robot by clicking "I'm not a robot" below.

Please make sure your browser supports JavaScript and cookies and that you are not blocking them from loading. For more information you can review the Terms of Service and Cookie Policy.

Block reference ID:

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Your usage has been flagged as a violation of our terms of service. For inquiries related to this message please contact support. For sales inquiries, please visit http://www.bloomberg.com/professional/request-demo

# data[].attributes.body
An article providing five strong reasons why immigration amnesty is good

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Last week, Judge Andrew Napolitano explained here at Reason.com that immigration is a natural right. What does that mean? A natural right is a right inherent to our humanity, and the freedom of movement is such a right. The idea that immigration needs to be "authorized" by the government flies in the face of that freedom. Immigrants who come to America seeking the opportunity to work and pursue happiness, or those brought here at too young an age to have any say in the matter, ought to be able to stay to pursue those opportunities. Conversely, employers ought to be able to enter into contracts with any would-be employees they please. The government doesn't own the country and political borders are just lines on maps. Treating law-abiding people like criminals simply because they didn't meet the bureaucratic requirements of migration abrogates their natural right to travel and Americans' natural right to freely associate and make contracts.
Next: What choice do we have?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
5 Reasons to Grant Amnesty to Illegal Immigrants

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Immigration reform returned to center stage in Washington last week with a proposal from a bipartisan group of senators that was promptly endorsed in principle by President Barack Obama. One of the lynchpins of the proposal is providing a "path to citizenship" for those who are currently in the co

# data[].attributes.body
An article written by Peter Nunez addressing points including the fact that the border is not secure and the amnesty clause is freeing more people than we think

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
San Diego Union-Tribune, February 17, 2013

# data[].attributes.body
An article written by Jim DeMint and Robert Rector about how amnesty for illegal immigration would affect countless amounts of jobs for unemployed Americans

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Jim DeMint is president and Robert Rector is a senior research fellow at the Heritage Foundation.

The economist Milton Friedman warned that the United States cannot have open borders and an extensive welfare state. He was right, and his reasoning extends to amnesty for the more than 11 million unlawful immigrants in this country. In addition to being unfair to those who follow the law and encouraging more unlawful immigration in the future, amnesty has a substantial price tag.

An exhaustive study by the Heritage Foundation has found that after amnesty, current unlawful immigrants would receive $9.4 trillion in government benefits and services and pay more than $3 trillion in taxes over their lifetimes. That leaves a net fiscal deficit (benefits minus taxes) of $6.3 trillion. That deficit would have to be financed by increasing the government debt or raising taxes on U.S. citizens.

For centuries immigration has been vital to our nation's health, and it will be essential to our future success. Yet immigrants should come to our nation lawfully and should not impose additional fiscal costs on our overburdened taxpayers. An efficient and merit-based system would help our economy and lessen the burden on taxpayers, strengthening our nation.

A properly structured lawful immigration system holds the potential to drive positive economic growth and job creation. But amnesty for those here unlawfully is not necessary to capture those benefits.

We estimate that when those who broke our laws to come here start having access to the same benefits as citizens do - as is called for by the Senate "Gang of Eight" immigration bill - the average unlawful immigrant household will receive nearly $3 in benefits for every dollar in taxes paid. The net annual cost is $28,000 per unlawful immigrant household.

Given the U.S. debt of $17 trillion, the fiscal effects detailed in our study should be at the forefront of legislators' minds as they consider immigration reform.

Already, illegal immigrants impose costs on police, hospitals, schools and other services. Putting them on a path to citizenship means that within a few years, they will qualify for the full panoply of government programs: more than 80 means-tested welfare programs, as well as Social Security, Medicare and Obamacare. The lifetime fiscal cost (benefits received minus taxes paid) for the average unlawful immigrant after amnesty would be around $590,000. Who is going to pay that tab?

Our government is now in the business of redistribution. As Nicholas Eberstadt, an economist at the American Enterprise Institute, has pointed out, federal transfer payments, or taking from one American to give to another, grew from 3 percent of spending in 1935 to about two-thirds of all spending in 2010. Adding millions of unlawful immigrants to U.S. programs will have a massive negative fiscal effect.

Our findings are based on empirical research and reflect common sense. Unlawful immigrants have relatively low earning potential because, on average, they have 10th-grade educations and low skills. Heads of households like that, whether from the Midwest or Central America, will receive, on average, about four times as much in government services and benefits as they pay in taxes. Adding millions more to bloated welfare and overburdened entitlement programs would deepen the fiscal hole our country is in.

In addition to costing taxpayers, amnesty is unfair to those who came to this country lawfully. More than 4 million people are waiting to come to the United States lawfully, but our dysfunctional bureaucracy makes it easier to break the law than to follow it.

Our cost estimates are in some ways very conservative: The $6.3 trillion figure does not factor in the waves of unlawful immigrants who could pour into this country hoping for another future amnesty. As scholars at the Heritage Foundation and elsewhere have explained, the comprehensive immigration bill being considered in the Senate differs little from previous empty promises to secure our borders and enforce immigration laws on the books. When amnesty was granted under a similar plan in 1986, there were about 3 million unlawful immigrants; now we have more than 11 million.

Instead of forcing through a complicated, lengthy bill, Congress ought to advance piece-by-piece immigration solutions that enjoy broad support and build trust with the American people. We should move to streamline our legal immigration system, encourage patriotic assimilation to unite new immigrants with America's vibrant civil society, fulfill promises to secure our borders and strengthen workplace enforcement.

We are proudly a nation of immigrants. People the world over are attracted to the United States because we are a nation of laws. Granting amnesty to those who broke the law and putting them on a path to citizenship would be unfair, would encourage more bad behavior and would impose significant costs on American families.

Read more from PostOpinions:

Charles Krauthammer: In immigration deal, a trigger and a poison pill

Jennifer Rubin: Conservative groups slam new immigration study

Greg Sargent: The right's last stand against immigration reform?

Editorial: Conservative backlash threatens immigration reform

Michael Chertoff: Obama's immigration agenda

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Amnesty for illegal immigrants will cost America

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Jim DeMint is president and Robert Rector is a senior research fellow at the Heritage Foundation. The economist Milton Friedman warned that the United States cannot have open borders and an extensive welfare state. He was right, and his reasoning extends to amnesty for the more than 11 million unlawful immigrants in this country.

# data[].attributes.body
Bulls and Bears report on how amnesty would wrongly affect the labor market

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Report: President mulls amnesty for millions of illegals. Fox News: Bulls & Bears http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/cost-of-freedom/index.html Fox News http://www.foxnews.com/ Fox News Insider: The Official Live Blog of Fox News Channel http://foxnewsinsider.com/ Fox News Live Wall Chat http://foxnewsinsider.com/live-wall/ Fox News Tweets http://foxnewsinsider.com/fox-news-channel-on-twitter Fox Business http://foxbusiness.com/ Fox Nation http://nation.foxnews.com/