Many people are skeptical of Donald Trump’s immigration rhetoric, but he has forced a much-needed debate on the issue. Leaders and candidates from both parties now must present their positions on immigration for voters to consider.
In her speech accepting the Democratic nomination for president, Hillary Clinton promised to deliver immigration policies more lax than the Obama administration. “I believe that when we have millions of hardworking immigrants contributing to our economy, it would be self-defeating and inhumane to kick them out,” she said. “Comprehensive immigration reform will grow our economy and keep families together.”
Clinton clarified on Sunday that she is willing to deport criminal illegal aliens. “My priorities are [to]deport criminals, violent criminals as fast as we can. Deport anybody that we think even has a possible link to terrorism.” Still, she doubled down on her call for amnesty, insisting it will be “good for the economy.”
Though it’s encouraging to see both major candidates support a crackdown on criminal illegal immigration, the former Secretary of State’s immigration agenda is premised on a falsehood. The argument that illegal immigration improves the American economy is absurd, because stubborn facts show that it’s actually a constant drain.
The Heritage Foundation estimates that families with an illegal head of household receive approximately $14,000 more in benefits than they pay in taxes. Additionally, the children of illegal immigrants require just over $12,100 to educate, with the cost falling entirely on the backs of taxpayers. The bill totals $43.9 billion for 3.6 million pupils. FAIR estimates that the cumulative cost of illegal immigration totals $113 billion every year.
But the legal immigration system is broken as well. On the other side of the ledger, dysfunctional H-1B system allows U.S. companies to lay off citizens in favor of cheap foreign workers. Major corporations like Intel and Disney fired thousands of Americans over the past few years to take advantage of this program. Giving good paying American jobs to foreign workers is hardly a policy we should tout.
If the federal government continues incentivizing illegal immigration with non-existent enforcement measures and access to social benefits, more Americans will end up looking for work in an already overcrowded job market. If the next president escalates the damaging immigration policies of the current administration, the results will devastate an already strained United States economy.
7 Comments
Clinton Attacks Trump’s Personality
While sweeping her own grievous crimes, foreign policy and security issues under the rug, which make Trump’s short comings look like mole hills in comparison.
Sadly, this article, like MSM articles on immigration, utterly fails to address disastrous birthright citizenship and equally disastrous chain migration.
This site has repeatedly addressed those things.
To follow her logic, ever more illegal immigrants with little education, a lot of times not even a high school diploma, few skills, and large families eligible for all sorts of welfare programs, should make us rich beyond compare. What she means is that it will “grow the economy” for all those big business firms that she and Bill give speeches to for a quarter million a pop, while workers struggle to make it.
I’m sure those in California who are old enough to remember think that when the state had 20 million people it was a far better place than today’s state of 38 million. Neil Diamond sang of an LA where “rents are low”. To say there is no connection between housing prices, rents, water supply, is simply ridiculous. LA traffic congestion is the worst in the nation.
And as usual, the media went for the three second sound bite and ignored the rest of the story. When Khizr Khan pulled out his copy of the constitution and asked Trump to read it, he never specified what part. But he told Anderson Cooper that it was “equal protection under the 14th amendment”. Of course there is nothing, absolutely nothing, in that amendment that says foreign nationals have any right to come here. In fact, federal law says the president can block any individual or group he wants.
Khan also told Cooper that laws in Muslim countries were a “hodgepodge” of English and French laws and that he does not “stand for any Sharia law because there is no such thing”. First of all, that is obviously a blatant lie, and he wrote a paper on Sharia in the 80s. But he’s a minority, so his lies are not examined by the media.
NBC has been in the tank for Hillary for a long time and out to get Trump on any made up story. This morning on the Today Show from Rio, there was a segment called The Download in which an anchor said that “Trump supporters like Rudy Guliani are hoping for an intervention”. A} Guliani specifically said two days ago that there was “no need” for any such intervention. B} There has been no such meeting and none is planned. C} Guliani said that Gingrich may have used the term in a memo. D} Gingrich was asked if he would be attending such a meeting and he replied “not me” in an email to various media outlets. So a meeting that didn’t happen and is denied by all parties still is touted by the media.
From PublicIntegrity.org
Comcast Foundation’s giving to minority groups likely to aid approval of Time Warner buyout
Support from minorities considered key issue for regulators
February 20, 2014
As Comcast Corp. and Time Warner Cable Inc. roll out a massive lobbying effort to win regulatory approval for the merger of the nation’s two largest cable companies, one key step for the companies will be garnering the support of prominent civil rights and minority groups.
–The data also show an emphasis by Comcast in building links to the Hispanic community. Of the $8.6 million given to groups that offered support in the NBC deal, nearly 60 percent went to Hispanic groups. The recipients included the National Council of La Raza ($2.2 million), the Hispanic Federation ($345,000) and the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce ($320,000).
–Support for the Time Warner Cable deal from the National Council of La Raza, the nation’s largest Hispanic civil rights group, would likely be even more helpful to Comcast.
In 2010, while the FCC was scrutinizing Comcast’s NBC purchase, La Raza was one of six Hispanic groups to send a letter to the FCC’s chairman highlighting an agreement they had struck with Comcast and NBC in advance of the merger.
As part of that deal, Comcast and NBC made a number of concessions, including the creation of new Spanish programming, increased funding for Hispanic scholarships, greater minority hiring and the addition of a Hispanic to Comcast’s board of directors.
The agreement with the merging companies would “promote the goals of expanding economic opportunity for Hispanic families and preserving and enhancing programming for Hispanic audiences,” Janet Marguia, La Raza’s president, and five other Hispanic leaders wrote to the FCC.
That agreement, and similar deals with other minority groups that have received Comcast funds, has drawn criticism from those who say the civil rights groups are selling short the interests of their constituents.
“Comcast has very big relationships with a lot of Hispanic politicians and nonprofit groups and I hope they are more challenging of this deal,” says Joe Torres, a spokesman for Free Press, a group that often opposes Comcast. “This is a massive merger and I’m hoping there will be a lot more skepticism.”
–Lisa Navarete, a spokeswoman for La Raza, says the 2010 deal with Comcast and NBC didn’t constitute a formal endorsement of the merger. More than three years after the agreement, she says the group is generally satisfied with Comcast’s outreach to Hispanics, though she says the group is concerned about the near-absence of Hispanic anchors on MSNBC or Hispanic actors on NBC staples such as “Saturday Night Live.” Still, she praises Comcast’s moves to add a Hispanic to its board, establish a minority advisory council and launch El Rey, an English-language channel targeting Hispanics.
The $2.2 million La Raza has received from Comcast will not affect the group’s planned negotiations with the company about the proposed Time Warner merger, nor did Comcast donations influence the group’s stance toward the NBC deal, Navarete says.
“The implication of those types of thoughts is minority organizations aren’t smart or sophisticated enough to be able to take money and still make a decision based on the merits,” she says. “I think its offensive to say we take positions based on who we get money from.”
Offensive but true. La Raza gets most all their money from corporations and then they shill for mass immigration.