Wednesday, May 8, 2013

The High Cost Of Amnesty

     The rush to pass a comprehensive immigration bill is for Republicants the fulfillment of a hope that they will garner more Hispanic votes in future elections, and for Democrats it is an addition of 8-12 million new voters to their base in one fell swoop. And while Republicant members of the "gang of eight", like Marco Rubio, can characterize the bill as anything but amnesty, in the final analysis, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it most certainly is a duck. And if the foundation of amnesty upon which this bill is built is not bad enough, the cost to taxpayers is even worse.
    The implementation costs alone for the proposed immigration bill went from 100 million to 1 billion dollars between versions of the bill. When questioned about the tenfold increase in implementation costs, Republicant gangers said the first estimate was a mistake. Sadly these same Republicants can not seem to muster the courage or the vision to see that the entire idea of immigration reform being discussed in the context of this bill, is a mistake. As it is with all government programs, the final cost to taxpayers will be solidly north of the estimate to which lawmakers are willing to admit.
     In addition to the implementation costs, taxpayers will be footing the bill for an even greater expense as a result of the amnesty bill. The Heritage Foundation conducted an economic analysis of the bill, and found that over a ten year period the bill will cost U.S. taxpayers 6 trillion dollars. These additional costs will be in the form of taxpayer-funded benefits, of which the newly amnestied immigrants can avail themselves. The six trillion dollars is the deficit between the additional taxes those given amnesty will pay and the real term dollars they will cost the nation as a whole in taxpayer-funded benefits.
     There is no greater sin that those in government can commit than to misuse precious taxpayer dollars that have been entrusted to them, especially when that misuse is a deliberate attempt to increase their political fortunes. This is a concept that we have witnessed for many decades by Democrats, and to such a large scale that it has become commonplace. But with the current amnesty bill, and the Republicants apparent capitulation on it, they have become no better stewards of the peoples money than their Democrat counterparts. The mis-characterization that those who support amnesty proffer at every opportunity when discussing illegal immigration, is that the current system is badly broken and in need of reform. My question is, "How can the case be made that a system of  laws that are not currently being enforced, be considered broken?" It is analogous to someone spending half a year's salary to replace their home's security system when all they really need to do is flip the switch to activate it.


  1. The Reagan amnesty yielded a very good friend of mine (second generation), but what's different now is welfare. If the Republicans would repeal welfare at the same time, I could accept amnesty, but as it is illegal consumption of welfare is far higher among illegal immigrants than legal consumption of welfare by citizens per capita.

    1. Also I like Rush Limbaugh's idea which has recently been picked up by Senator Cruz, i.e., give them amnesty but they can't vote for 25 years, if ever. You would see the Left pull their support for illegal immigration faster than you can say, "Democrat voter."