Did He Really Just Say That?

Google+ Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr +

In a House of Representatives Judiciary Committee Hearing on Thursday, Committee members debated H.R. 2278, the “Strengthen and Fortify Enforcement Act” (the SAFE Act) proposed by Immigration Subcommittee Chair Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC). The SAFE Act contains a myriad of immigration enforcement measures aimed at improving interior enforcement.

Amidst impassioned testimonies from witnesses as well as Representatives, Rep. John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.) said the enforcement measures in the bill were simply too costly to enforce. “This is going to cost a lot of money…and most states and localities can’t afford it and I can attest that the federal budget can’t afford it.”

So then what does the Ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee propose as an alternative? Yes, you guessed it, “comprehensive immigration reform!” (See Rep. Conyers’ press release)

By demanding “comprehensive immigration reform” (i.e. amnesty) instead of immigration enforcement, Rep. Conyers completely ignores the monetary consequences of a mass amnesty. In fact, according to the Heritage Foundation, the Gang of Eight’s amnesty bill currently being considered in the Senate will cost U.S. taxpayers $6.3 trillion over the course of the next 50 years.

But, not only does Rep. Conyers refuse to consider the cost of an amnesty to U.S. taxpayers, he fails to consider the costs of our government continuing to ignore our immigration laws. In fact, the Administration’s current system of turning a blind eye to illegal immigrants costs taxpayers billions annually, at a tune of $113 billion at the federal, state, and local level (nearly $29 billion at the federal level and $84 billion at the state and local level).

At the end of the day, Rep. Conyers’ statement opposing the bill on fiscal grounds illustrates nothing more than the pro-amnesty lobby’s amnesty-first, enforcement-never approach to fixing our nation’s immigration system. It is paradoxical to allow those who oppose an enforcement bill on the grounds of cost to the government, to support a comprehensive immigration bill that only perpetuates this country’s already severe deficit.

Share.

About Author

avatar

Content written by former Federation for American Immigration Reform staff.

3 Comments

  1. avatar

    Here’s the truth. Anyone who votes for this bill as is will be voting to invite chaos and lawlessness on the country. Any amendments offered that dare to require that the laws of this country actually be followed are cast as a “poison pill”. Poison to who? The law abiding citizens of this country, or Latinos who have to be pandered to for votes?

  2. avatar

    So we can spend money on doing the amnesty part, and the infrastructure to do that will be quite large, but we won’t have enough money to do the enforcement part?
    Ok, then we will just do the enforcement part, like the laws of this country obligate us to do, and forget the amnesty.

    • avatar

      This a Good Reason I Avoid Voting Attorneys in as Our Politicians

      With the money supply tight and attorney fees high; they have no work…..so these attorney politicians love to play the endless bill and open border litigation game….jo security on the voters’ dime.

      Meanwhile these same politician attorneys don’t say a word about 150K engineers eliminated from 2006-2010, mainly automotive and space…..the brightest engineers by far in the world and they ripped America’s manufacturing heart out. The Americanengineer is the proverbial canary in America’s coal mine and America and the canary are already dead or dying.

      Welcome to the apocolypse NWO.