Report: Every Deported Illegal Household Saves Taxpayers More than $700,000

Screen Shot 2015-08-25 at 11.27.16 AM

BY JULIA HAHN

Advocates for mass-migration are using skewed financial claims to smear Donald Trump’s popular border proposals, which actually would help revive the near-bankrupt Social Security and Medicare programs.

For every illegal migrant household that leaves the United States under Trump’s plan, Americans would recoup nearly three-quarters of a million dollars ($719,350), according to 2010 data collected by Heritage scholar Robert Rector.

The lifetime savings accrued from one deported illegal household would provide funds for 125 low-income inner city students to receive the maximum Pell Grant award in 2015-2016 ($5,775); it could cover the cost of pre-kindergarten for 90 at-risk children (around $8,000 per child); or it could cover the one year cost of Medicaid for 124 enrollees ($5,790 based on FY2011 data).

But business interests want the migrants to stay. That’s because migrants help lower the cost of Americans’ wages, but also because the migrants spend their wages — plus taxpayer aid — at retail stories and rental agencies.

For example, the American Action Forum (AAF), a business-backed pro-amnesty group, claims that legal costs and forced migration would spike the cost of Trump’s plan up to $300 billion to arrest and remove all illegal immigrants living in the United States. The AAF was founded by Fred Malek, who co-founded and chairs a hospitality investment company whose hotels employ many low skilled migrants.

AAF’s cost projections have been trumpeted by many in the mainstream media such as NBC and Fox News.

In reality, “a modest increase in enforcement (such as E-verify or visa tracking) would cause significant attrition in the illegal population– sending millions of illegals home on their own at no cost to the U.S. taxpayer.” said Jessica Vaughan, policy director at the non-partisan Center for Immigration Studies.

There’s good evidence for Vaughan’s argument. “Arizona’s population of unauthorized immigrants of working age fell by about 17 percent” in the course of a single year, after the state began to enforce E-verify, according to the Public Policy Institute of California.

The claim from Malek’s AAF also ignores the financial savings caused by the return of migrants to their home countries.

Illegal migrants cost U.S. taxpayers a net total of nearly $100 billion annually, concluded a 2010 investigation by the Federation for American Immigration Reform.

The 2010 report calculated the total contributions (mainly taxes) generated by the illegal migrants, and then subtracted the cost of taxpayer aid to those migrants. The aid includes education, subsidized housing, food stamps, tax credits, medical expenses. Overall, the report found illegal migrants cost taxpayers a total of $113 billion a year. The report then “accounts for taxes paid by illegal aliens [which is] about $13 billion a year, resulting in a net cost to taxpayers of about $100 billion.”

Under the Trump plan, that spending could be used to reduce taxpayer spending. The resulting savings could fund the entire federal cost of major proposals by liberal Democrats, such as a Universal Pre-Kindergarten program. President Obama’s original 2013 proposal was projected to cost $75 billion over a decade.

Or the government could allocate 60 percent more resources and benefits for returning American soldiers and veterans (increasing the President’s 2016 budget request for the VA from its current $168.8 billion to $268.8 billion)

Alternatively, public schools could have the funds to employ an additional 1.9 million elementary school teachers to help teach young Americans in already-overcrowded schools.

State and local governments could employ 1.6 million more police officers in to reduce crime in gang-besieged neighborhoods.

These savings could the expand the government’s allotment for Emergency Shelter Grants, which provide support for the homeless or victims of domestic violence, by than 400 times its 2014 budget ($250 million).

Upon first hearing the costs illegal migrants impose upon U.S. taxpayers, many find the figure difficult to believe, says Heritage’s Robert Rector:

“The debate about the fiscal consequences of unlawful and low-skill immigration is hampered by a number of misconceptions. Few lawmakers really understand the current size of government and the scope of redistribution… Unlawful immigrants, on average, are always tax consumers; they never once generate a ‘fiscal surplus’ that can be used to pay for government benefits elsewhere in society.”

Nations that are more serious about enforcing their immigration laws, however, are aware of the fiscal burdens mass migration places on its citizenry and have taken measures to combat economic strains. Israel, for example, has begun offering migrants $3,500 in cash and a one-way airplane ticket home in order to encourage repatriation.

Birth tourism: 71% of illegals with kids collect welfare…

Capture

BY IAN TUTTLE

Peter and Ellie Yang,” the subjects of Benjamin Carlson’s fascinating new Rolling Stone essay, “Welcome to Maternity Hotel California,” paid $35,000 to have their second child in the United States. In 2012 Chinese state media reported 10,000 “tourist births” by Chinese couples in the United States; other estimates skew as high as 60,000. Following Donald Trump’s call for an end to birthright citizenship, and renewed attention on “anchor babies,” Carlson’s exposé on “birth tourism” seems to confirm that the current interpretation of the 14th Amendment works as a magnet for at least some parents across the globe. But just how big a magnet is it? According to Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) legal policy analyst Jon Feere, who testified before the House Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security in April, between 350,000 and 400,000 children are born annually to an illegal-alien mother residing in the United States — as many as one in ten births nationwide. As of 2010, four out of five children of illegal aliens residing in the U.S. were born here — some 4 million kids. Reporting that finding, the Pew Research Center noted that, while illegal immigrants make up about 4 percent of the adult population, “because they have high birthrates, their children make up a much larger share of both the newborn population (8 percent) and the child population (7 percent) in this country.” The cost of this is not negligible. Inflation-adjusted figures from the U.S. Department of Agriculture projected that a child born in 2013 would cost his parents $304,480 from birth to his eighteenth birthday. Given that illegal-alien households are normally low-income households (three out of five illegal aliens and their U.S.-born children live at or near the poverty line), one would expect that a significant portion of that cost will fall on the government. And that’s exactly what‘s happening. According to CIS, 71 percent of illegal-alien headed households with children received some sort of welfare in 2009, compared with 39 percent of native-headed houses with children. Illegal immigrants generally access welfare programs through their U.S.-born children, to whom government assistance is guaranteed. Additionally, U.S.-born children of illegal aliens are entitled to American public schools, health care, and more, even though illegal-alien households rarely pay taxes. RELATED: Trump’s Critics Are Wrong about the 14th Amendment and Birthright Citizenship The short-term cost of “anchor babies” was revealed a decade ago in the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons. “‘Anchor babies’ born to illegal aliens instantly qualify as citizens for welfare benefits and have caused enormous rises in Medicaid costs and stipends under Supplemental Security Income and Disability Income,” wrote medical attorney Madeleine Pelner Cosman. She noted the increasingly costly situation in California: In 2003 in Stockton, California, 70 percent of the 2,300 babies born in San Joaquin General Hospital’s maternity ward were anchor babies, and 45 percent of Stockton children under age six are Latino (up from 30 percent in 1993). In 1994, 74,987 anchor babies in California hospital maternity units cost $215 million and constituted 36 percent of all Medi-Cal [California’s Medicaid program] births. Now [2005] they account for substantially more than half. While perhaps humane, measures such as the 1986 Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act, which requires hospital emergency departments to treat all patients with an “emergency” (an infinitely malleable term), regardless of documentation or ability to pay, have facilitated the abuse of American health care by illegal aliens, according to Cosman. RELATED: What Conservatives Get Wrong about Birthright Citizenship and the Constitution There are long-term costs, too. U.S.-born children of illegal aliens can sponsor the immigration of family members once they come of age. At 18, an “anchor baby” can sponsor an overseas spouse and unmarried children of his own; at 21, he can sponsor parents and siblings. There may be a long waiting period before that legal benefit is of use. But it’s a fact that illegal aliens with American-born children are much less likely to be deported, and that policy has been effectively enshrined in law with President Obama’s Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA) policy, which would effectively grant amnesty to some 5 million illegal aliens, on top of the 2 to 3 million granted amnesty under his Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) policy. (DAPA is currently under scrutiny in the courts.) GET FREE EXCLUSIVE NR CONTENT It is difficult to contend that the promise of birthright citizenship is not serving as a magnet. Carlson’s Rolling Stone essay is not about “anchor babies,” as the term is commonly applied (to children of illegal aliens), but about “birth tourists” — persons from overseas, typically of some means, who acquire temporary visas in order to give birth in the United States. Yet if middle-class Chinese (and Russian and Turkish and Nigerian) couples are incentivized by the 14th Amendment to travel to the U.S. to give birth, shouldn’t it be an even bigger draw for expecting mothers from Latin America, who typically live in much more difficult circumstances? Note, as an indicator of the power of immigration incentives, the massive influx of unaccompanied minors that converged on the U.S.–Mexico border last summer when news of DACA spread through Central America. Ending birth tourism is difficult. The tools available to Customs and Border Patrol — for example, spotting and enforcing visa fraud — are ineffective, and the penalty for at least some visa-related offenses is a prohibition on visits after the current visit. MORE IMMIGRATION DID FACEBOOK INTENTIONALLY BLOCK POSTS FROM CONSERVATIVE IMMIGRATION THINK TANK? WORK IN BIGTECH FOR HIRE: AMERICANS NEED NOT APPLY ON IMMIGRATION, SANTORUM ADDS SUBSTANCE But “anchor babies” are a largely preventable phenomenon, mainly by simply enforcing current immigration laws. Stopping illegal immigration at the border, and instituting an actually effective visa-tracking system to crack down on overstays, would do much to discourage efforts to take advantage of American largesse. With The Donald’s prompting, birthright citizenship has become the focus of the current news cycle — despite the fact that, given current political realities, the composition of the Supreme Court, and the history of 14th Amendment jurisprudence, ending the practice is a fanciful aim. But that is all right. “Anchor babies” are a small, though not negligible, component of our ongoing illegal-immigration crisis. And prioritizing border and visa enforcement to help end our much larger problems will do much to resolve this one, too.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/422921/birthright-citizenship-economic-costs-incentives

*(GENTLE GIANTS NEED MONEY)* – Welfare Payout Statistics That Will Make Your Blood Boil!

Having trouble just making ends meet because of taxes that go to people who don’t work?

Check your State and see how you’d do not working at all! [BELOW] Hit that share button and Tweet or send an email link to every working man and woman you know.

BY RODNEY LEE CONOVER

ARA

A Cato Institute study has determined that welfare benefits in fact payout more than a full time minimum wage job in at least 35 states! WTF?

1. The free money is more than $15 an hour in over ten states
2. Welfare is more than a newly college educated teacher in eleven states makes
3. Outdoes the salary of a computer programmer in three states!
4. The highest welfare payouts are over $20 an hour! (Hawaii, with payments equaling $29.13 per hour, DC at $24.43 per hour, Massachusetts at $24.30 , Connecticut at $21.33, New York at $21.01 per hour, New Jersey at $20.89 per hour, Rhode Island at $20.83 per hour and Vermont at $20.36 per hour)

THIS IS INSANE

Pissed off yet? You need to hit that share button, Facebook, Tweet and send an email link to this story to every working man and woman you know. NOW!
Read more at http://joeforamerica.com/2015/05/welfare-payout-statistics-will-make-really-mad/

VIDEO: Obama Classmate Comes Forward With Huge Accusation Against “Suicide Bomber” Obama

Wayne Allyn Root, one of Obama’s classmates at Columbia University, Class of 1983, has come forth to expose President Barack Obama and his purposes to “destroy” America.

Root believes that Obama is the primary danger for America.

People end up voting for the party that “promises to keep the checks coming or better yet, expand the checks. Then slowly, like boiling a frog who doesn’t realize what’s happening until he’s dead, capitalism dies,” Root explained.

“Obama is dive-bombing our nation’s economy the same way that the Germanwings Airline co-pilot Andreas Lubitz crashed his plane into the ground in France two months ago,” he concluded.

Welfare Woman Of 3 Children Brags: ‘I Will Never Work’

Screen Shot 2015-08-13 at 2.54.17 PM

Recently, a woman named Lucy in Riverside, TX made a very bold statement. She claimed that staying at home with her three children and living on welfare is “the smarter way to live” than having a job.

Lucy revealed her position when she called into the KLBJ radio station in Austin, TX. Her intention was to publicly disagree with the hosts, who were discussing the morality of working hard rather than being on welfare. After revealing some key information, hosts determine that Lucy makes about $1,200 a month on welfare.

That means that he bills are completely covered. Her rent is only $50 a month, her cell phone is free, she has $425 to spend each month on food, and even has money provided to her for electricity and water. To top it off, her husband receives family benefits.

According to Lucy, she plans to be on welfare for the rest of her life, claiming that it gives her the ability to stay home all day, and that she has time to spend with her friends. She says that if others were to be given the same opportunity, or handed a million dollars with no requirements to fulfill, that it would simply be foolish to work.

IMMIGRATION TO SWELL U.S. MUSLIM POPULATION TO 6.2 MILLION . . .

Screen Shot 2015-07-17 at 10.17.35 AM

http://video.breitbart.com/?ndn.trackingGroup=90085&ndn.siteSection=breitbart_nws_us_sty_vmppap&ndn.videoId=29272405&freewheel=90085&sitesection=breitbart_nws_us_sty_vmppap&vid=29272405

The Associated Press and NBC are now reporting that Tennessee gunman Muhammed Youssef Abdulazees was an immigrant from the Muslim nation of Kuwait.

According to U.S. Census Data, the United States admits roughly 100,000 Muslim immigrants legally each year, representing the fastest growing block of immigration into the United States. Tennessee, in fact, is home to one of the fastest growing immigrant populations in the country, causing the President to give a recent speech there in favor of expansive immigration. The Mayor of Nashville has launched a New American Advisory Council to help facilitate the legally-sanctioned transition from the previous inhabitants of Nashville to the new ones.

Both of Tennessee’s Senators,

Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN)

24%

and

Sen. Bob Corker (R-TN)

51%

, helped pass the Senate’s Gang of Eight bill which would have tripled the number of green cards issued over the next ten years.

Unlike illegal immigrants, legal immigrants invited into the United States with green cards are granted automatic work permits, welfare access, and the ability to become voting citizens.

Pew Research has estimated that immigration will cause the population of U.S. Muslims to more than double over the next two decades—from 2.6 million in 2010 to 6.2 million in 2030. This demographic change is entirely the product of legal admissions–that is, it is a formal policy of the federal government adopted by Congress.

Another major source of Middle Eastern immigration into the United States is done through our nation’s refugee program. Every year the United Stated admits 70,000 asylees and refugees. Arabic is the most common language spoken by refugees, and 91.4 percent of refugees from the Middle East are on food stamps.

The importation of Middle Eastern immigrants through the nation’s refugee program has led to the development of pockets of radicalized communities throughout the United States.

Minnesota, for instance, which has the largest Somali population in the country, has struggled to stem terror recruiting. The Minneapolis Star Tribune recently reported that six men from Minnesota were arrested and charged attempting to fight alongside ISIS. During the last two years alone, more than 20 Somali-Americans from Minnesota have left the U.S. to fight alongside terrorists under the banner of ISIL.

Similarly, as National Review has reported, “Dearborn, Michigan is home to just under 100,000 people, about 40 percent of whom are Muslim. In 2013, a leaked government document revealed that more people from Dearborn were on the federal terrorist watch list than from any other city except New York.”

The head of the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services Union, Kenneth Palinkas, recently warned about this very issue: “It is also essential to warn the public about the threat that ISIS will exploit our loose and lax visa policies to gain entry to the United States. Indeed, as we know from the first World Trade Center bombing in 1993, from the 9/11 terrorist attacks, from the Boston Bombing, from the recent plot to bomb a school and courthouse in Connecticut, and many other lesser-known terror incidents, we are letting terrorists into the United States right through our front door.”

He listed a number of terror attacks in which the attackers were immigrants voluntarily imported into the United States, including the Boston Marathon Bombing. None of these attacks would have occurred but for immigration sanctioned by the federal government.

News reports show that this is similarly emerging as a problem in Florida. A recent piece in The Tampa Tribune reveals that Florida now leads the nation as the number one state resettling refugees.

As one Floridian community liaison manager with Refugee Services estimated for The Tampa Tribune, Florida settles 27,000 refugees, on average, per year.

According to the federal government, Florida resettled 43,184 refugees in 2013.

While most of these refugees settling in Florida arrive from Cuba, many arrive from Middle Eastern countries. According to the U.S. Office of Refugee Resettlement, the next largest countries to resettle in Florida after Cuba are (in order) Iraq, Myanmar (Burma), the Democratic Republic of Congo, Sudan, Somalia, Colombia, Afghanistan, Jordan, Pakistan, Syria, and Palestine.

The Tampa Tribune reports that many of these Muslim refugees are carving out their own Muslim communities within Florida (similar to what refugees have done in Dearborn and Minneapolis): “Many of the refugees finding homes in the Tampa Bay area are Muslim because the region has an established Muslim community.”

The Tampa Tribune also notes that most of these refugees, precisely because they are invited in legally by our government, will go on to seek citizenship. Tampa immigration lawyer B. John Ovink told The Tampa Tribune, “Citizenship is straightforward. Once they enter as refugees or are granted asylum, they apply for permanent residency, the proof of which is a green card. It’s pretty automatic unless something changes in their country of origin and they are forced to go back. But I haven’t seen that happen in the 22 years I’ve been practicing law.”

On the heels of these developments, two Republican Senators–

Sen. Pat Toomey (R-PA)

63%

and Dan Coats (R-IN)–have announced plans to substantially increase immigration from countries with large Muslim populations as a condition of a new highway bill. They are proposing to attach “highly-skilled” immigration bills from last Congress, which would expand the number of STEM workers (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics)–large numbers of whom come from countries with large Muslim populations like Pakistan, India and Saudi Arabia. The Tennessee killer was himself an engineering student.

Similarly, presidential contender Senator

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL)

80%

has also introduced immigration legislation that would substantially increase opportunities for Muslim immigration by creating an uncapped green card program for foreign students specializing in STEM fields while tripling the number of H-1B visas. One of the fastest growing groups of foreign students are from Saudi Arabia, helping propel the foreign student population to an all-time high.

Senator Rubio’s statement on the terrorist attack in Tennessee did not mention anything about Islam.