Illegal Immigration and Government Aid | Center For A Just Society

Cato has an interesting commentary on Rick Perry?s past support for legislation that provides citizenship and possible college tuition aid to children of illegal immigrants who complete at least two years of college.? The typical Republican voter is likely to respond with anger: Why are we giving citizenship and money to people who should be deported?? But Cato?s Daniel Griswold cautions that there are other factors at play.? I can see his initial point (click here to read his whole article):

In a free society, so-called DREAM Act legislation would be unnecessary. Opportunities for legal immigration would be open wide enough that illegal immigration would decline dramatically. And higher education would be provided in a competitive market without state and federal subsidies. But that is not yet the world we live in.

But his following argument is more controversial:

First, kids eligible under the DREAM Act came to the United States when they were still minors, many of them at a very young age. They were only obeying their parents, something we should generally encourage young children to do.

Second, these kids are a low-risk, high-return bet for legalization. Because they came of age in the United States, they are almost all fluent in English and identify with America as their home (for many the only one they have ever known). ?Assimilation? will not be an issue.

They also represent future workers and taxpayers. The definitive 1997 study on immigration by the National Research Council, The New Americans, determined that an immigrant with some college education represents a large fiscal gain for government at all levels. Over his or her lifetime, such an immigrant will pay $105,000 more in taxes than he or she consumes in government services, on average and expressed in net present value (see p. 334). In other words, legalizing an immigrant with post-secondary education is equivalent to paying off $105,000 in government debt.

Griswold?s points are worth considering, but I think he ultimately falls short in his assessment.? The practical financial benefit of an educated illegal populace does not justify ignoring the traditional purpose of our immigration laws.

Perhaps if we greatly decreased illegal immigration then we might consider programs like this as a means to deal with and help the illegal population already living in the U.S.? But short of a significant slowing of illegal immigration, this kind of program will merely provide an even greater incentive for people to immigrate illegally.

There are many problems with our current approach to immigration, but too great a focus on the financial impact of immigrants will hurt efforts to cultivate and preserve our national identity and founding principles.? The financial impact is one of many considerations, but new immigrants are people ? not mere economic producers.

Source: http://www.centerforajustsociety.org/2011/10/11/32728/blog/illegal-immigration-and-government-aid/

arsenal transfer news ui vi vi wesley sneijder wesley sneijder land rover defender