ImmigrationSen. Rubio slams Heritage Foundation report on cost of immigration reform
Senator Marco Rubio(R-Florida) wasted little time attacking a report by the Heritage Foundation which estimated that new immigration overhaul legislation, of which Rubio is one of the authors, would cost taxpayers $6.3 trillion over fifty years. “The Heritage Foundation is] the only group that’s looked at [immigration reform] and reached the conclusion they’ve reached. Everybody else who has analyzed immigration reform understands that if you do it, and we do it right, it will be a net positive for our economy. Their argument is based on a single premise, which I think is flawed,” Rubio added. “That is these people are disproportionately poor because they have no education and they will be poor for the rest of their lives in the U.S. Quite frankly, that’s not the immigration experience in the U.S. That’s certainly not my family’s experience in the U.S.”
Sen. Marco Rubio criticizes a Heritage Foundation study // Source: horytna.net
Senator Marco Rubio(R-Florida) wasted little time attacking a report by the Heritage Foundation which estimated that new immigration overhaul legislation, of which Rubio is one of the authors, would cost taxpayers $6.3 trillion over fifty years.
The New York Times notes that Heritage used dynamic scoring system, which projects economic growth when determining the cost of legislation. Heritage has long supported using this methodology, as have other Republicans who have used it in the past to justify tax cuts, arguing that dynamic scoring would show that such cuts will add less to the federal deficit than estimated, and may even pay for themselves by boosting economic growth and generating tax receipts.
“Heritage, I think, is the king of dynamic scoring, and in many respects we’ve advocated for dynamic scoring here because of the positions that they’ve taken,” Rubio told reporters. “They are the only group that’s looked at this issue and reached the conclusion they’ve reached. Everybody else who has analyzed immigration reform understands that if you do it, and we do it right, it will be a net positive for our economy.
“Their argument is based on a single premise, which I think is flawed,” Rubio added. “That is these people are disproportionately poor because they have no education and they will be poor for the rest of their lives in the U.S. Quite frankly, that’s not the immigration experience in the U.S. That’s certainly not my family’s experience in the U.S.”
The Heritage analysis arrived at the figure of $6.3 trillion by assuming that, over the next fifty years, immigrants would receive $9.4 trillion in government benefits and services and pay only $3.1 trillion in taxes.
Critics of the report say the analysis does not take into account the economic benefits which would flow from taking millions of people out of the underground economy, and that it underestimates social and economic upward mobility of second- and third-generation immigrants.
Heritage dismissed the criticism by Rubio and others.
“The dynamic scoring complaint is merely an attempt to distract from the entirely valid and incontrovertible finding of our report: that amnesty will cost taxpayers at least an additional $6.3 trillion in government benefits,” the organization stated.
The Times reports that Rubio had anticipated the foundation report (in 2007, Heritage issued a similar report, encouraging Republican opponents of George W. Bush’s immigration reform bill to vote against it; Bush’s measure failed), and sent a letter to the foundation urging it to continue supporting “pro-growth economic policy and analysis.”
“As I consider the potential impact of immigration reform, I am keenly aware that there will be budgetary impacts when illegal immigrants begin to access citizenship beginning 13 years after immigration reform is enacted,” Rubio wrote.
“However, I also believe that immigration reform that shifts the mix of legal immigration away from family-based toward highly skilled/merit-based combined with bringing millions of undocumented aliens out of the underground economy will improve the labor market, increase entrepreneurship and create jobs, leading to a net increase in economic growth and reducing the deficit.”
