Are illegal immigrants damaging America's economy and security?
PRO (yes)
CON (no)
The Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), in its Immigration Issue Centers website section entitled "The Estimated Cost of Illegal Immigration," last updated Feb. 2004, stated:
"Illegal alien workers may increase profits for employers, but they are costly to the American taxpayer. Most illegal aliens have low educational attainment, few skills, and they work for low wages, often in the underground economy where they pay no taxes on their earnings. [...] While the cost of outlays for illegal aliens may be shifted by legislation among the levels of government and the private sector, the fact remains that illegal immigration creates an enormous fiscal burden on America and its citizens — a burden that Congress has levied upon us through short-sighted and haphazard immigration policy and succeeding administrations have aggravated by spotty enforcement of the law."
Steven A. Camarota, PhD, Director of the Center for Immigration Studies, in an Oct. 23, 2005 The Arizona Republic article titled "Use Enforcement to Ease Situation," wrote:
"That America has an illegal-immigration problem is not in question... Legalization mocks legal immigrants and will spur more illegal immigration... Legalization also does not solve most of the problems associated with illegal immigration. The poorest and least educated American workers would still face job competition from millions of legalized illegal aliens. Letting illegals stay only makes sense if you think the poor are overpaid...
Moreover, illegal aliens create significant costs for taxpayers mainly because they are unskilled, not because they are illegal. At least 60 percent lack a high school diploma. Such people pay relatively little in taxes regardless of legal status because they earn so little in the modern American economy. My research indicates that the net fiscal drain (taxes minus costs) would triple if we legalized illegals. Unskilled illegal aliens are costly, but unskilled legal immigrants cost even more because they can more easily access social programs.
Donald L. Barlett and James B. Steele, Investigative Journalists and Editors at large Time Inc., wrote in their Sep. 20, 2004 special report on immigration titled "Who Left the Door Open?" published in Time magazine:
"Beyond the terrorism risks, Washington's failure to control the nation's borders has a painful impact on workers at the bottom of the ladder and, increasingly, those further up the income scale. The system holds down the pay of American workers and rewards the illegals and the businesses that hire them. It breeds anger and resentment among citizens who can't understand why illegal aliens often receive government-funded health care, education benefits and subsidized housing.
In border communities, the masses of incoming illegals lay waste to the landscape and create costly burdens for agencies trying to keep public order. Moreover, the system makes a mockery of the U.S. tradition of encouraging legal immigration. Increasingly, there is little incentive to play by the rules."
Jim Kouri, MA, Vice-president of the National Association of Chiefs of Police, in a Mar. 21, 2006 NewsWithViews.com article titled "The Big Govn't. Lie: Illegal immigration Benefits Americans," wrote:
"Even though illegal aliens make little use of welfare, from which they are generally barred, the costs of illegal immigration in terms of government expenditures for education, criminal justice, and emergency medical care are significant. Californian officials have estimated that the net cost to taxpayers in order to provide government services to illegal immigrants approached $3 billion during a single fiscal year.
The fact that states must bear the cost of federal failure turns illegal immigration, in effect, into one of the largest unfunded federal mandates existing today."
Eugene A. Delgaudio, Sterling District Supervisor of Loudoun County, Virginia, in a July 17, 2007 article titled "A New Beginning," retrieved from his website, offered the following:
"Illegal immigration is taking a greater and greater toll on this community... While lax federal and state enforcement allows the problem to develop, local government is also at fault when it rewards law-breakers with access to free taxpayer-funded services.
Giving away free services to people whose very presence is a felony is unfair to people who obey the law. More and more of their own money goes to support lawbreakers and subsidized increasing problems of overcrowding, litter and gang crime. It's an insult to native-born taxpayers and taxpayers who took the time and effort to come here legally. We must be responsible, both fiscally and legally.
That is why we are introducing this item [2007 Loudoun County Resolution(PDF) 28 KB] to begin the process of legally terminating taxpayer-funded services to illegal aliens."
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), in a Mar. 12, 2002 ACLU website section titled "Immigrants and the Economy," offered the following:
"Blaming immigrants for the nation's woes has long been an American pastime, especially in hard economic times like today. Recently, there has been an upsurge in anti-immigrant sentiment, particularly in areas of the country that host large number of immigrants. Public opinion surveys indicate that the public does draw a distinction between legal and undocumented immigrants, and that the public regards undocumented immigrants with increasing disfavor.
One of the most well-entrenched myths about immigrants is that they steal jobs from American workers, collect an excess of government benefits and in general represent a drain on the economy. Contrary to popular belief, immigrants do not take away jobs from American workers. Instead, they create new jobs by forming new businesses, spending their incomes on American goods and services, paying taxes and raising the productivity of U.S. businesses. Immigrants are good for the economy, not the other way around."
The Washington Post, in a June 4, 2007 editorial article titled "Immigrants Equal Growth... Reform Isn't Just Humane. It's Self-Interest," offered the following:
"Amid the blizzard of data concerning immigrants' effects on wages, welfare and municipal budgets, the essential point is this: The latest wave of immigrants -- legal and illegal, skilled and unskilled -- has stimulated enormous economic activity and wealth generation in this country, and it is implausible that the American economy would fare as well without them...
Since most immigrants come when they are young and working... they tend not to collect Social Security or Medicare for many years -- even while paying into the systems with payroll taxes, in many cases with phony Social Security numbers (meaning they will contribute but not collect). In fact, illegal immigrants do not get federal welfare benefits of any kind. At the same time they often pay income tax (through paycheck withholdings) and sales tax, thereby helping directly or indirectly to underwrite transportation, health care, education and other services.
And while immigrants surely have contributed to some extent to the ranks of the poor, that was also true of previous waves of immigrants; the point is, most of those immigrants didn't stay poor."
The Punisher, Blogger for The Obfuscation Report internet blog, in an Aug. 23, 2007 post titled "I'm Sick of Hearing About Immigration and Security," retrieved from "The Obfuscation Report," wrote:
"In fact 'illegal aliens' are not terrorists. None of them. The 9/11 Hijackers all had entered the United States LEGALLY. All of them. At the time of the attacks only three of the 19 had actually even fallen out of legal status. Most of them entered as tourists 4 or 5 months before the attack. The truth is that 'terrorism' is just as likely to be committed by a former member of the U.S. Military than it is by a 'foreigner' (see Oklahoma City, D.C. Sniper, Atlanta Olympics etc. etc.) If a person is determined to come to the U.S. and blow [expletive] up, they will find a way to do it. The current system is just racial profiling."
Tamar Jacoby, Senior Fellow at the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research, stated in her July 26, 2005 testimony before the US Senate Committee on the Judiciary:
"The native-born American work force is aging; it's shrinking. Today's young people aspire to work inside, with their minds not their muscles. And it's good news for us that there are immigrants eager to come to our country to do the unskilled work that we need done. What's more, this relatively small number of immigrant workers helps keep a much larger number of American workers employed. Many American businesses could not grow without immigrant workers. Others, including in agriculture and food processing, would find it difficult to remain in the United States...
So the problem with our immigration system isn't the immigrants. The problem is that our immigration quotas provide so few opportunities for most of them to enter the country legally... [T]here are only 5,000 visas available for unskilled foreigners seeking year-round work...
This is the heart of the current crisis. We need the labor; foreign workers want the jobs. But there are no legal channels—so inevitably people come illegally. And it is this mismatch—the mismatch between the size of the flow and our quotas—that creates most of the problems we associate with immigration."
The Winston-Salem Journal, a daily newspaper from North Carolina, stated in a Mar. 29, 2005 editorial titled "Congress and Immigration":
"The United States faces another immigration problem at the other end of the labor spectrum. Security concerns mean that it is far more difficult for highly educated immigrants and foreign students to get visas.
There have been significant reductions, for example, in the number of foreign students applying to American universities... And because foreign-born graduate students often teach math, science and engineering courses, some universities are strained to find enough adequately trained teachers for their courses...