Immigration Policy Center absurd study claims immigration "reform" would help economy

COVID-19 Response

Like everyone else, we urge you to wash your hands and engage in social distancing.

Unlike everyone else, we urge you to also help with this smart plan to get more tests, ventilators, and PPE. Everyone can do that plan right now, at home, in just 15 minutes.

If enough people help with the plan we can save lives. Take time out now and help get more desperately-needed supplies.

The Immigration Policy Center (IPC) - part of the American Immigration Lawyers Association-linked American Immigration Law Foundation - has released a new, canard-rich study called "What Immigration Reform Could Mean for the U.S. Economy" (

1. They claim that the 2006 and 2007 comprehensive immigration reform bills would have paid for themselves. They fail to note the full cost of those amnesties which would include such things as giving the Mexican government even more political power inside the U.S.

They note that the Congressional Budget Office estimated that the "Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006 would have generated $66 billion in new revenue during 2007-2016 from income and payroll taxes, as well as various administrative fees."

Now, divide that by 10 years, and then divide that by a very generous low estimate of 100 million U.S. households. That means that the increased revenue they promote represents approximately $5.50 per month for each household in the U.S.

Would you sell out U.S. sovereignty, give foreign governments and far-left and racial power groups even more power inside the U.S., and reward massive illegal activity by millions of people, and enable years of corruption by politicians for the equivalent of a midsize Burger King combo? There might certainly be additional economic benefits from "reform", but there would also be additional costs. And, the IPC isn't including all of those in its analysis.

If anyone tries to offer an economic argument in favor of "reform", ask them for a bottom line of the monthly take of the average U.S. household. Then, point out all the costs they aren't taking into account.

2. As have many others, they claim that enforcement doesn't work because we've spent billions on it even as the number of illegal aliens has risen. They fail to note that much of that enforcement has been designed to fail or has been undercut by those groups who support illegal immigration.

3. For their claim that deporting current illegal aliens wouldn't be feasible, they rely on the joke study "Deporting the Undocumented" from the Center for American Progress.

4. They agitate against EVerify using the CBO study that showed that the use of that program could cause the federal government to lose about $17 billion over 10 years due to lost tax revenues. They fail to note that that tax revenue would be from money that was earned illegally, a massive moral hazard that we must do without.


Get ready to see 100 million little black and brown brothers and sisy coming here each day taking your jobs and your country away from you. by the way the osama obama people now have a list of people that are against mass third world dismantling of this once great nation, we "our", all called Rebellious against government, what comes next will be out of some world war two movie. buy Guns.

you are a fucking racist piece of shit fred. take a gun to your head and blow your fucking brains out you miserable crank.

_Get ready to see 100 million little black and brown brothers and sisy coming here each day..._ Fred has the time frame wrong but the general trend in that direction is clear. _...mass third world dismantling of this once great nation..._ This is another way to express what's going on. Last time I was in a DMV office in California the people in there did mostly look like they came from third world countries. CALIFORNIA - Per capita income in state is expected to sink over 20 years - Growth in poorly educated population is blamed in study [1] _Californians' per capita income will drop 11 percent over the first two decades of this century unless the state closes the educational gap of its expanding Latino population, a nonpartisan research center forecast in a report released today...Latinos are the fastest-growing segment of the state's population and work force, and among the least-educated, said the National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education...According to 2000 census figures, in the 25-to-64 age group, 52 percent of Latinos lacked a high school diploma, compared with 8 percent of non-Latino whites, and 12 percent of Latinos had a college degree, compared with 46 percent of whites._ Seems rather third world-ish to me.


"unless the state closes the educational gap of its expanding Latino population" They may as well have said unless we invent a tree that grows money. This will never happen, as we all know, no matter how much money we throw at the problem. Back in the 60'-70's California's schools ranked first or second in the nation. Now they are down in the mid-to-low-40's with Alabama and Mississippi. Let's put on our thinking caps now: What changed between the 70's and now? Can we guess?

So we just paint anyone who is black or brown with a broad brush and subject them to fred's comments? I am not buying it eh. Usually you are reasonable, and not rushing to the defense of someone who reminds me of lester maddox. fred is an old, bitter, angry racist, from a time long gone. soon he will meet his maker and have to answer for his hatred of his "brothers." i will be here long after he is six feet under to piss on his grave. I am all for directing invective to people who have no legal right to be here. but directing racist commentary on the basis of skin color makes me cringe. some of my black and brown brothers are legal citizens, like it or not, and my fellow citizens deserve some respect. those here illegally do not. i am a little disappointed you have chosen the low road, eh. next time you quote an old, racist angry crank, i will be here to call you out on your bullshit.

petty: you insist a racist theme upon Fred's remarks but that's not what his comments are about (but yours are). So, it reads here that you're the one with racist references: your "black and brown brothers..." They're your brothers? As in, communist workers united? Fred's referring to the by-far-majority-black-brown "people" that generally describes our Third World "neighbors" (in your parlance, "brothers") to the south of the U.S., NOT to "all people" who may be "brown and black" or either. Why do the "people" (your, uh, "brothers") from south of the U.S. even need to be IN the U.S.? Their own nations that they've built are wrecked or never had value enough to be wrecked? What? Why the limitations among such people, compared to the achievements of us people in "El Norte"? It just may be racially related, but in a biological way, though certainly in my view in a cultural way. But your remarks are the racist ones here, as also, they're quite crude.

Hey Bubbala, are you related to fred? Your comment is almost as incoherent

absolutely incoherent. who invited the third grade dropout to the party? my "brothers" are my countrymen, dickwad. are you even able to read before you comment? fred does not like anyone nonwhite or jewish, if you were able to open your eyes and read, fucktard. moreover, i was not aware of anyone black south of our border. you may want to check a globe before you open your ignorant piehole. this is what makes internet commenting such a unproductive enterprise--any dumbshit loser living in his mom's basement with a dial-up modem is able to comment here, as evidenced by whats-his-names nonsensical drivel, on par with fred, of course.