The cost of illegal’s

[MOUNTAINORACLE]

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pitt...ion/archive/s_
564463.html


The cost of illegal’s
A landmark study released this month quantifies the true costs of

illegal aliens.
Edwin Rubenstein, noted economist and widely published business

journalist, examined the budgets of 15 federal agencies. He

discovered that immigration added costs to every one and virtually

all government programs.
The bottom line is dripping with red ink.
Among Mr. Rubenstein's findings:
• Each illegal alien costs taxpayers more than $9,000
• Each four-person illegal alien household costs taxpayers $36,000
• The Bureau of Land Management annually spends about $1 million

to mitigate the environmental damage done by illegal’s crossing the

southern border.
• The federal government provides $250 million a year to help

hospitals pay for aliens' emergency medical treatment.
• The feds annually give about $300 million to state and local

governments to pay for criminal aliens who have flooded prisons.

That covers less than 25 percent of the cost of incarceration.
Finally, the not-so-hidden costs of illegal aliens are being exposed.

We invite members of the open-borders lobby to respond to these

findings -- so we have a return address to forward the bill.



oracle

[LittleRedToyota]

frankly, those numbers are surprisingly low for something some people raise such a stink about.

compared to other ways the government wastes money, anything less than tens of billions per year is pocket change.

if i were in the "build a fence" camp, i would not use these numbers to support my argument that this issue should be a top priority...because, looking at it solely from a cost standpoint, those numbers put it waaaaaayyyy down on the priority list.

as crazy as it seems...if you are not talking about at least tens of billions a year, it is a trivial issue compared to the cost of the failed war on drugs, welfare/other entitlement programs (for american citizens), etc.

in the big picture, i don't really care one way or the other about illegal immigration...i've always felt it was just not that big of an issue compared to some other issues we face. frankly, these numbers confirm that from a cost perspective.

(now, tightening border security for the purposes of stopping terrorists from entering the country is a different issue...)

[ChrisAHF]

I believe the Center for Immigration Studies estimated 45 billion a year spent of illegal immigration. Although that isnt the biggest problem we face, its still up there. As the problem is only grow year by year.

[LorDiego01]

Offset that cost, by how much money Americans save due to cheaper labor and products, and I'm sure it'll pay for itself.

[billamj]

I would note that there is nothing in those numbers about correcting the social security information for those citizens who have their social security numbers stolen and used by illegals. I would wager that particular number would be on the high side, just another item to add to the list. I would also wager that the "cheap labor" rates are not passed on to us since the business owner at that point would have to admit to hiring illegals in order to give a discount that his competition can't afford to.

[schr8er2000]

Here in Hazleton we have problems with the ILLEGALS..... and it just amazes me that people stand up for them. What part of ILLEGAL dont they understand ???

I have NO problem with immigrants... just do it legally.... like our ancestors had to do... learn the American way... speak ENGLISH... and do it by the book. Yes the illegals in a way save us money by providing cheap labor... but with what we have to spend for their medical costs, infrastructure, schooling etc. its costing us more and more each day.

We welcome LEGAL immigrants every single day... but if you do it ILLEGALLY then go back where you came from...

[LittleRedToyota]

Here in Hazleton we have problems with the ILLEGALS..... and it just amazes me that people stand up for them. What part of ILLEGAL dont they understand ???

...

but if you do it ILLEGALLY then go back where you came from...

i'm not defending them. and i have no problem with arresting and deporting them.

however, i don't see it as as big of an issue as some people make it out to be.

and, imho, all the attention paid to illegal imigration takes attention away from (imho) more important issues we face.

if you study world history, you will find a certain pattern that emerges over and over:

1. a prosperous country becomes fat, bloated, and lazy...with many people feeling a sense of (unearned) entitlement.

2. the country begins to experience economic decline due to being fat and bloated (in a socio-economic sense, not a physical fitness sense) and lazy.

3. all those people who think they are entitled to the good life just because they were born start to feel the pinch.

4. these people don't want to blame themselves...because that would mean they would have to solve the problems themselves...so, they look for someone else to blame.

5. "nationalist" politicians come along and give these people someone else to blame...minorities, heathens, some other country, the jews, immigrants...whoever happens to be the easiest, smallest, most defenseless, least controversial target. just as long as it is "someone else".

6. the country gets swept up in this anti-whoever_gets_blamed "nationalism", and ignores the real issues and problems underlying its decline.

7. therefore, the country continues and even speeds up its downward economic spiral...and creates additional social problems. (as resources are devoted to fighting the boogie man instead of addressing real problems.)

8. eventually, the country collapses or is defeated in a war.

it has happened time and time again.

this may or may not be what is happening here in the USA today...but it certainly looks eerily familiar.

[LorDiego01]

I have NO problem with immigrants... just do it legally.... like our ancestors had to do... learn the American way...

Our ancestors did not have to deal with the INS, and pay tens of thousands of dollars to the government. They simply showed up, signed a paper, got a medical, and on they went with their new earned freedom.

And what exactly is the American way?? Care to expand on that subject just a tad more?

[bige64]

http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalexec.html

http://www.immigrationcounters.com/

The High Cost of Cheap Labor
Illegal Immigration and the Federal Budget

Executive Summary

This study is one of the first to estimate the total impact of illegal immigration on the federal budget. Most previous studies have focused on the state and local level and have examined only costs or tax payments, but not both. Based on Census Bureau data, this study finds that, when all taxes paid (direct and indirect) and all costs are considered, illegal households created a net fiscal deficit at the federal level of more than $10 billion in 2002. We also estimate that, if there was an amnesty for illegal aliens, the net fiscal deficit would grow to nearly $29 billion.

Among the findings:

*

Households headed by illegal aliens imposed more than $26.3 billion in costs on the federal government in 2002 and paid only $16 billion in taxes, creating a net fiscal deficit of almost $10.4 billion, or $2,700 per illegal household.

*

Among the largest costs are Medicaid ($2.5 billion); treatment for the uninsured ($2.2 billion); food assistance programs such as food stamps, WIC, and free school lunches ($1.9 billion); the federal prison and court systems ($1.6 billion); and federal aid to schools ($1.4 billion).

*

With nearly two-thirds of illegal aliens lacking a high school degree, the primary reason they create a fiscal deficit is their low education levels and resulting low incomes and tax payments, not their legal status or heavy use of most social services.

*

On average, the costs that illegal households impose on federal coffers are less than half that of other households, but their tax payments are only one-fourth that of other households.

*

Many of the costs associated with illegals are due to their American-born children, who are awarded U.S. citizenship at birth. Thus, greater efforts at barring illegals from federal programs will not reduce costs because their citizen children can continue to access them.

*

If illegal aliens were given amnesty and began to pay taxes and use services like households headed by legal immigrants with the same education levels, the estimated annual net fiscal deficit would increase from $2,700 per household to nearly $7,700, for a total net cost of $29 billion.

*

Costs increase dramatically because unskilled immigrants with legal status -- what most illegal aliens would become -- can access government programs, but still tend to make very modest tax payments.

*

Although legalization would increase average tax payments by 77 percent, average costs would rise by 118 percent.

*

The fact that legal immigrants with few years of schooling are a large fiscal drain does not mean that legal immigrants overall are a net drain -- many legal immigrants are highly skilled.

*

The vast majority of illegals hold jobs. Thus the fiscal deficit they create for the federal government is not the result of an unwillingness to work.

*

The results of this study are consistent with a 1997 study by the National Research Council, which also found that immigrants' education level is a key determinant of their fiscal impact.

A Complex Fiscal Picture
Welfare use. Our findings show that many of the preconceived notions about the fiscal impact of illegal households turn out to be inaccurate. In terms of welfare use, receipt of cash assistance programs tends to be very low, while Medicaid use, though significant, is still less than for other households. Only use of food assistance programs is significantly higher than that of the rest of the population. Also, contrary to the perceptions that illegal aliens don't pay payroll taxes, we estimate that more than half of illegals work "on the books." On average, illegal households pay more than $4,200 a year in all forms of federal taxes. Unfortunately, they impose costs of $6,950 per household.
Social Security and Medicare. Although we find that the net effect of illegal households is negative at the federal level, the same is not true for Social Security and Medicare. We estimate that illegal households create a combined net benefit for these two programs in excess of $7 billion a year, accounting for about 4 percent of the total annual surplus in these two programs. However, they create a net deficit of $17.4 billion in the rest of the budget, for a total net loss of $10.4 billion. Nonetheless, their impact on Social Security and Medicare is unambiguously positive. Of course, if the Social Security totalization agreement with Mexico signed in June goes into effect, allowing illegals to collect Social Security, these calculations would change.

The Impact of Amnesty.
Finally, our estimates show that amnesty would significantly increase tax revenue. Because both their income and tax compliance would rise, we estimate that under the most likely scenario the average illegal alien household would pay 77 percent ($3,200) more a year in federal taxes once legalized. While not enough to offset the 118 percent ($8,200) per household increase in costs that would come with legalization, amnesty would significantly increase both the average income and tax payments of illegal aliens.

What's Different About Today's Immigration.
Many native-born Americans observe that their ancestors came to America and did not place great demands on government services. Perhaps this is true, but the size and scope of government were dramatically smaller during the last great wave of immigration. Not just means-tested programs, but expenditures on everything from public schools to roads were only a fraction of what they are today. Thus, the arrival of unskilled immigrants in the past did not have the negative fiscal implications that it does today. Moreover, the American economy has changed profoundly since the last great wave of immigration, with education now the key determinant of economic success. The costs that unskilled immigrants impose simply reflect the nature of the modern American economy and welfare state. It is doubtful that the fiscal costs can be avoided if our immigration policies remain unchanged.

Policy Implications
The negative impact on the federal budget need not be the only or even the primary consideration when deciding what to do about illegal immigration. But assuming that the fiscal status quo is unacceptable, there are three main changes in policy that might reduce or eliminate the fiscal costs of illegal immigration. One set of options is to allow illegal aliens to remain in the country, but attempt to reduce the costs they impose. A second set of options would be to grant them legal status as a way of increasing the taxes they pay. A third option would be to enforce the law and reduce the size of the illegal population and with it the costs of illegal immigration.

Reducing the Cost Side of the Equation.
Reducing the costs illegals impose would probably be the most difficult of the three options because illegal households already impose only about 46 percent as much in costs on the federal government as other households. Thus, the amount of money that can be saved by curtailing their use of public services even further is probably quite limited. Moreover, the fact that benefits are often received on behalf of their U.S.-citizen children means that it is very difficult to prevent illegal households from accessing the programs they do. And many of the programs illegals use most extensively are likely to be politically very difficult to cut, such as the Women Infants and Children (WIC) nutrition program. Other costs, such as incarcerating illegals who have been convicted of crimes are unavoidable. It seems almost certain that if illegals are allowed to remain in the country, the fiscal deficit will persist.

Increasing Tax Revenue by Granting Amnesty.
As discussed above, our research shows that granting illegal aliens amnesty would dramatically increase tax revenue. Unfortunately, we find that costs would increase even more. Costs would rise dramatically because illegals would be able to access many programs that are currently off limits to them. Moreover, even if legalized illegal aliens continued to be barred from using some means-tested programs, they would still be much more likely to sign their U.S.-citizen children up for them because they would lose whatever fear they had of the government. We know this because immigrants with legal status, who have the same education levels and resulting low incomes as illegal aliens, sign their U.S.-citizen children up for programs like Medicaid at higher rates than illegal aliens with U.S.-citizen children. In addition, direct costs for programs like the Earned Income Tax Credit would also grow dramatically with legalization. Right now, illegals need a Social Security number and have to file a tax return to get the credit. As a result, relatively few actually get it. We estimate that once legalized, payments to illegals under this program would grow more than ten-fold.

From a purely fiscal point of view, the main problem with legalization is that illegals would, for the most part, become unskilled legal immigrants. And unskilled legal immigrants create much larger fiscal costs than unskilled illegal aliens. Legalization will not change the low education levels of illegal aliens or the fact that the American labor market offers very limited opportunities to such workers, whatever their legal status. Nor will it change the basic fact that the United States, like all industrialized democracies, has a well-developed welfare state that provides assistance to low-income workers. Large fiscal costs are simply an unavoidable outcome of unskilled immigration given the economic and fiscal realities of America today.

Enforcing Immigration Laws.
If we are serious about avoiding the fiscal costs of illegal immigration, the only real option is to enforce the law and reduce the number of illegal aliens in the country. First, this would entail much greater efforts to police the nation's land and sea borders. At present, less than 2,000 agents are on duty at any one time on the Mexican and Canadian borders. Second, much greater effort must be made to ensure that those allowed into the country on a temporary basis, such as tourists and guest workers, are not likely to stay in the country permanently. Third, the centerpiece of any enforcement effort would be to enforce the ban on hiring illegal aliens. At present, the law is completely unenforced. Enforcement would require using existing databases to ensure that all new hires are authorized to work in the United States and levying heavy fines on businesses that knowingly employ illegal aliens. Finally, a clear message from policymakers, especially senior members of the administration, that enforcement of the law is valued and vitally important to the nation, would dramatically increase the extremely low morale of those who enforce immigration laws.

Policing the border, enforcing the ban on hiring illegal aliens, denying temporary visas to those likely to remain permanently, and all the other things necessary to reduce illegal immigration will take time and cost money. However, since the cost of illegal immigration to the federal government alone is estimated at over $10 billion a year, significant resources could be devoted to enforcement efforts and still leave taxpayers with significant net savings. Enforcement not only has the advantage of reducing the costs of illegal immigration, it also is very popular with the general public. Nonetheless, policymakers can expect strong opposition from special interest groups, especially ethnic advocacy groups and those elements of the business community that do not want to invest in labor-saving devices and techniques or pay better salaries, but instead want access to large numbers of cheap, unskilled workers. If we choose to continue to not enforce the law or to grant illegals amnesty, both the public and policymakers have to understand that there will be significant long-term costs for taxpayers.

Summary Methodology
Overall Approach. To estimate the impact of households headed by illegal aliens, we rely heavily on the National Research Council's (NRC) 1997 study, "The New Americans." Like that study, we use the March Current Population Survey (CPS) and the decennial Census, both collected by the Census Bureau. We use the March 2003 CPS, which asks questions about income, household structure, and use of public services in the calendar year prior to the survey. We control total federal expenditures and tax receipts by category to reflect actual expenditures and tax payments. Like the NRC, we assume that immigrants have no impact on defense-related expenditures and therefore assign those costs only to native-headed households. Like the NRC, we define a household as persons living together who are related. Individuals living alone or with persons to whom they are unrelated are treated as their own households. As the NRC study points out, a "household is the primary unit through which public services are consumed and taxes paid." Following the NRC's example of using households, many of which include U.S.-citizen children, as the unit of analysis makes sense because the presence of these children and the costs they create are a direct result of their parents having been allowed to enter and remain in country. Thus, counting services used by these children allows for a full accounting of the costs of illegal immigration.

Identifying Illegal Aliens in Census Bureau Data.
While the CPS does not ask respondents if they are illegal aliens, the Urban Institute, the former Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), and the Census Bureau have used socio-demographic characteristics in the data to estimate the size and characteristics of the illegal population. To identify illegal aliens in the survey, we used citizenship status, year of arrival in the United States, age, country of birth, educational attainment, sex, receipt of welfare programs, receipt of Social Security, veteran status, and marital status. This method is based on some very well-established facts about the characteristics of the illegal population. In some cases, we assume that individuals have zero chance of being an illegal alien, such as naturalized citizens, veterans, and individuals who report that they personally receive Social Security benefits or cash assistance from a welfare program or those who are enrolled in Medicaid. However, other members of a household, mainly the U.S.-born children of illegal aliens, can and do receive these programs. We estimate that there were 8.7 million illegal aliens included in the March 2003 CPS. By design, our estimates for the size and characteristics of the illegal population are very similar to those prepared by the Census Bureau, the INS, and the Urban Institute.

Estimating the Impact of Amnesty.
We assume that any amnesty that passes Congress will have Lawful Permanent Residence (LPR) as a component. Even though the President's amnesty proposal in January seems to envision "temporary" worker status, every major legalization bill in Congress, including those sponsored by Republican legislators, provides illegal aliens with LPR status at some point in the process. Moreover, Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry has indicated his strong desire to give LPR status to illegal aliens.

To estimate the likely impact of legalization, we run two different simulations. In our first simulation, we assume that legalized illegal aliens would use services and pay taxes like all households headed by legal immigrants with the same characteristics. In this simulation, we control for the education level of the household head and whether the head is from Mexico. The first simulation shows that the net fiscal deficit grows from about $2,700 to more than $6,000 per household. In the second simulation, we again control for education and whether the household head is Mexican and also assume that illegals would become like post-1986 legal immigrants, excluding refugees. Because illegals are much more like recently arrived non-refugees than legal immigrants in general, the second simulation is the more plausible. The second simulation shows that the net fiscal deficit per household would climb to $7,700.

Results Similar to Other Studies.
Our overall conclusion that education level is the primary determinant of tax payments made and services used is very similar to the conclusion of the 1997 National Research Council report, "The New Americans." The results of our study also closely match the findings of a 1998 Urban Institute study, which examined tax payments by illegal aliens in New York State. In order to test our results we ran separate estimates for federal taxes and found that, when adjusted for inflation, our estimated federal taxes are almost identical to those of the Urban Institute. The results of this study are also buttressed by an analysis of illegal alien tax returns done by the Inspector General's Office of the Department of Treasury in 2004, which found that about half of illegals had no federal income tax liability, very similar to our finding of 45 percent.

I've posted this before but it seems very relevant for this thread as well. This is the costs of just one year.

[JDePietro]

Our issues with imigrants of any nature is because of the econimic decline in general. And that, Ladies and Gentlemen is due to our own arogance and misuse of public funds. This sentiment that we must rob eachother for eachothers gain is ludicrous. We demand a right to such comunistic ideals as Social Security and Social Welfare. And then subsidies for famers and schools. (Don't get me started on Public Schools) We have given the goverment every right to assume that our money is their money to be spent and played with as the seem fit. So if one year we decide poor farmer Joe is in need they can pander to his interests by robbing us and then the mechanic in turn when and how they see fit.

I hate to hear this war cry against illegal imigrants (Not Aliens!) because those people yearn for the freedom that our country offers.
Yes we have put the trough out for all to feed from by offering such ridiculous notions like free money and healthcare. We offer such abusive programs and subsidies and so they come seeking a life rid of economic oppression. Yes the birds flock to the feeder and then we act as is they have no right!

WE hold these truths to be self evident, that ALLmen are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

Have we forgotten whence we came? I do not see anything in there about only America citizens! If these people seek freedom how can we deny them that which their goverment has? Are we no beter?

My friends I hold you all dearer than the nearist of kin but do not be swayed by such political pandering to get you away from the real questions.
Look to the US Constituion for your answers! We as a Country have allowed this upon ourselves now let us rid us of it. But not by targeting those who have nothing and take only what we offer to them.