By Dave Leach (en español) – Our $680 billion national deficit would drop by $250 billion a year, and the U.S. economy would grow by 1% over ten years, just from letting one million more immigrants come legally, according to every economist who testified before the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee.
In early 2013, the Committee heard 39 expert witnesses over 5 hearings as it considered S744, the Immigration Reform bill. No economist disagreed with the claim of Dr. Douglas Holtz-Eakin that a million more legal immigrants would slash our national deficit by over a third. Which raises the question: why aren’t citizens demanding that we let three million more immigrants come legally, and save America from bankruptcy?
Of course, the reason no economist at the hearings disagreed with Holtz-Eakin was that Holtz-Eakin was the only economist invited to the hearings. Which raises the question: why didn’t the Senate want to hear from more than one economist out of 39 witnesses as it drafted a bill titled, in part, “economic opportunity”?
This is part three of a series. The Spanish translation was published in El Enfoque, in Iowa, December 25, 2014, back page. The rest of the series is posted, with the Spanish translation, at www.CafeConLecheRepublicans.com/Libertad-divertido. There you will find links to documentation, to Youtube bilingual videos, and to a free ebook.
Several witnesses said Holtz-Eakin is wrong. They said immigration hurts the economy, takes jobs from citizens, drives down wages, increases our dangerous national debt, and saps our welfare resources, but they aren’t economists. That is, they have no credentials certifying them as experts on the economy. None of them cared enough about understanding the economy to make that their major in college. They are Undocumented Economists.
Undocumented Economist Peter Kirsanow was paired with Holtz-Eakin at the April 19, 2013 hearing. Later the Committee heard four Undocumented Economists from the Center for Immigration Studies alone. CIS is the center of Undocumented Economics “research”. No one on the staff of CIS, FAIR, or Numbers USA has a degree in economics, yet their message to the world is how bad immigration is for our economy.
Why was the Senate at least five times more attentive to Undocumented Economists than to actual economists who actually studied the subject in college?
Not that economics can’t be understood without a college degree. I myself believe I have some understanding of economics that will benefit the world, even though my degree is in trumpet playing. But don’t you think credentialed economists should have at least as much voice as undocumented economists like me and the Center for Immigration Studies, concerning legislation that will significantly impact our economy?
Holtz-Eakin is one of America’s leading economists. He was a university professor of economics, and he was head of the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), which advises Congress about the economic impact of their laws. He answered Kirsanow’s claims that the more uneducated immigrants we allow, the more they will take jobs and drive down wages of low-skilled, uneducated citizens – especially blacks. He said,
“The presence of competition that is a real issue for our low-skill Americans is not about immigration. It is about being in a global economy where there is a great abundance of low-skill labor and the geographic location has very little to do with it….[When we have] a skilled worker or an unskilled worker being paid half the wage in another country and coming here and being paid twice the wage [do you think that makes him more competitive?!] It is competition regardless. And I guess for me, I would hope our aspirations would be greater than protecting low-skill Americans in perpetuity from competition they cannot avoid, and instead, building their skills.” (Page 19 of the transcript.)
…when the many policy objectives are put on the table, economics [must] not get lost in the shuffle. [Immigration law] is a central tool of economic policy. This is an opportunity for us to improve on our [population and economic] growth record, which has not been good….The evidence is that new immigrants to the United States both work more – their labor force participation rates are higher, and have small businesses at a higher rate. As a result, [S744] will increase the productivity growth in the U.S. economy – the fundamental building block of higher standards of living, and generate larger economic growth numbers than we have seen in recent years. …you could have as much as nearly a full percentage point faster growth over 10 years [and reduction of] deficits by about $2.5 trillion over 10 years. (Page 7-8 of transcript; 45:50 in the video.)
Are citizens denying themselves economic opportunities to exactly the extent they deny it to immigrants, just as Luke 6:38 warns?
Iowa’s Senator Grassley will head the Senate Judiciary Committee next year, which will process any immigration bills. We can ask him if he plans to be as attentive to real, credentialed economists next year, as the Committee was to Undocumented Economists last year.
Next: what else Holtz-Eakin told the Senate.
This is part three of a series. This is posted, with the translation, at www.CafeConLecheRepublicans.com/Libertad-divertido. There you will find links to documentation, to Youtube bilingual videos, and to a free ebook.