Conservative Groups Push Amnesty While Proclaiming Financial Doom

Philosoraptor questions fiscals hawks promoting amnesty?philosoraptor_CBOWith the recent news from the Congressional Budget Office that deficit projections for 2013 will be lower than expected, three right-of-center policy groups rushed to remind taxpayers that America’s fiscal situation is unsustainable while trumpeting the Gang of Eight’s amnesty plan despite estimates that amnesty will cost trillions.

1. American Action Forum

Serving as the main ambassador for amnesty to conservatives, Doug Holtz-Eakin from the American Action Network warned:

The big news is that CBO revised the current-year deficit projection down from $845 billion to $642 billion — a shift that stemmed from two special, one-time, non-repeating, 2013-only (get the point?) factors: (1) a revision up of $105 billion in estimated tax collections and a $95 billion combined dividend payment from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  For the entire 2014-2023 period, CBO changed its revenue projections by only $95 billion, so the good news is isolated to 2013.

Indeed, the 10-year deficit remains at $6.3 trillion, down ever so slightly from the $6.9 trillion projected in February.

The big driver of deficits remains spending over the next 10 years, especially the health and retirement programs — Social Security ($10 trillion), Medicare ($8 trillion), Medicaid ($4 trillion), ObamaCare ($1 trillion), etc.  CBO left its outlook for that tsunami essentially unchanged.

That $6.3 trillion figure should sound familiar. Ironically, the figure that the pro-amnesty Holtz-Eakin uses is same as the estimated cost of amnesty over the next fifty years according to the Daily Signal. A figure, the American Action Forum and their other pro-amnesty organizations – the Hispanic Leadership Network and the American Action Network – have repeatedly attacked because the Heritage study did not use a questionable type of methodology that makes the numbers look better for amnesty proponents.

2. American Enterprise Institute

On Thursday, the American Enterprise Institute’s James Pethokoukis highlighted a disturbing analysis released from JPMorgan:

This analysis from JPMorgan is sums things up nicely:

The latest CBO projections look for the federal budget deficit to hit bottom at 2.1% of GDP in FY 2015 and then gradually rise to 3.5% of GDP in 2023, the end point for the 2014-2023 10-year forecast. This convenient end point makes current policies appear to be sustainable, or at least sustainable with only gradual adjustments and fixes over the next decade.

Around 2023 demographics trends turn brutal. The latest (June 2012) CBO long-term projections show that under the more realistic “extended alternative fiscal scenario,” the federal budget deficit rises by more than 10% of GDP from 2022 to 2037. This reflects in large part the aging of the population and the movement of baby boomers into years of more intense medical needs. Increasing primary deficits also bring, over time, significant increases in interest payments as a share of GDP.

Around the same time as JPMorgan’s “brutal” projections, FAIR estimates that the U.S. would have admitted nearly 34 million immigrants under the Gang of Eight bill, which is likely to accompany a surge of amnestied aliens receiving some kind of entitlement program.

While the Gang of Eight swear that their bill would be an economic boon, U.S. Census data shows that immigrants are far more likely to fall below the poverty line & use social programs than non-immigrants.

Keep in mind that while amnestied aliens are currently banned from Obamacare, they would still be eligible for Social Security benefits and other state programs. Thus, starting around the same time as the “brutal” figures, the first wave of amnestied aliens could be eligible to start drawing Social Security. Last week, FAIR’s Jack Martin cited a 2010 study:

Most of the arguments that adoption of the amnesty would be an economic benefit – like Sen. Rubio’s – are based on the assumption that newly legalized workers will get better jobs and move out of poverty. The experience with the beneficiaries of the 1986 amnesty proves that assumption is naïve – at best – or deliberately misleading welfare.

Since the majority of illegal aliens have less than a high school education, they would face limited opportunities to find legal employment. Currently, about half of recent college graduates are working jobs that don’t require a degree, and many are working for minimum wage. The idea that “immigrants will do the work that American’s won’t” is not true.

As much as Senator Rubio would like to claim all aliens would improve their economic standing because his own family did, lessons from the 1986 amnesty differ. A survey conducted of those receiving amnesty in 1986, found that after five years, the majority did not see any improvement and some saw a decrease in their standard of living. As that “brutal” future hurtles towards us, remember that amnestied aliens stuck in low-paying jobs will receive far more in Social Security benefits than they ever contributed.

3. U.S. Chamber of Commerce

As one of the main partners who helped draft the legislation, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce continues to champion the bill and their part in negotiating a “guest” worker program with labor unions.

Sean Hackbarth of, a project from the U.S. Chamber, writes that the CBO makes optimistic projections:

…CBO’s 10-year projection doesn’t assume any recessions. That would mean that the U.S. economy wouldn’t experience a recession over a 14-year period. There hasn’t been such a long period of uninterrupted growth in the post-World War II era. Falling revenues and increased counter-cyclical spending caused by a recession would exacerbate our fiscal situation.

While the news of a smaller-than-expected deficit is welcome, it doesn’t mean we can avoid reforming entitlement programs. A harsh fiscal crisis is still impending if we don’t.

Hackbarth notes that these projections only work under the best circumstances possible. Even if we saw an unrealistic period of growth — which remains unlikely given that only 63.3% of working-age adults in the labor force are unemployed — the country still faces a deficit of $6.3 trillion before the added expense of the Gang of Eight amnesty.

These organizations cannot support the Gang of Eight bill and proclaim that our country is doomed because of entitlement spending. Instead of bowing to the special interests that would benefit from amnesty, it’s time for these groups to admit that they can’t be a fiscal hawks and support the Gang of Eight.

About Author


The latest guest opinion pieces from FAIR.


  1. avatar

    Who told you there were “Conservative” groups? The US Chamber of Commerce is also a total communist operation that has been pushing open door policies for years so their employer members can get CHEAP labor without concern for quality. They are like unions, but the the employers pay the dues and rake in the profits. The AEI has always seemed tremendously odd and often conflicted so their credibility is worth nothing. Lets keep it simple here, for those who vote for the Gang of 8 or any amnesty plan and citizenship will NOT receive VOTES, so hopefully they have other jobs lined up.

  2. avatar

    FAIR is run by very nice people with good and noble intentions.

    However, they were founded in 1979. Since this date, our immigration situation – both legal and illegal – has exponentially worsened each year. Perhaps it’s time that FAIR rethinks its strategy.

    My own solution is the change Congress with pro-FAIR candidates.

    It would not be hard to identify key geographic sectors where a FAIR-supported candidate will win. It is important to remember that more than 10 years ago in the most liberal state of the union – California – citizens voted overwhelmingly on a statewide voter initiative to end government funding to illegals – Prop 209 (later overturned by the courts- why?). So, it is clear that Americans of all ages and nationalities support the work of FAIR.

    It is time to actually do something about it – changing Congress is the only way, and the most effective way to do this. Otherwise, FAIR will simply be what it is now – a reactionary and rather ineffective organization. It’s time to get on the offensive, and stop playing defense.


  3. avatar

    The title has it wrong.
    They are not conservative groups. They are business groups, looking for cheaper labor, pure and simple.
    They will sell us out for a 2 cent improvement in their bottom line, then take bigger bonuses for screwing us.
    We need to stop ALL immigration for at least 20 years, stop importing crap rom china and other countries, and rebuild our domestic manufacturing. That will probably require a ban on imports, and that will cause some temporary pain through increased prices, but it will level out in a short time, we’ll restore our jobs and economy, and get better quality if we have the courage to do it.
    The rest of the world needs us more than we need them.
    We should also stop all foreign student visas. Why give visas, scholarships, and aid to people to enable them to compete more effectively with us?
    Also, stop ALL foreign aid. Cut taxes and use the money we’ve been giving to tin pot dictators overseas to improve our own condition and infrastructure. Foreign aid money ends up lining the pockets of people like Arafat, Abas, Karzai, and other corrupt tyrants … Hardly any, if any, of it actually helps the people it purports to help anyway.

  4. avatar
    Sarah Moorin on

    Who is Protecting the US Citizens? I am a 5th generation African American female.This is not a race issue. Why are illegal invaders more important than US citizens. Who is looking out for our overload of homeless, unemployed citizens. What about our children. Our system is already bankrupt. Who will care for these people. Where is the money coming from?? The tax payer will pay NOT the gang of 8. If the “gang” HAD TO CARE for these illegal invaders the bill would not have passed. MEXICAN INVESTOR CARLOS SLIM was the RICHES man in the WORLD until Bill Gates put him in second place a few days ago. Most of the proponents of this crime against America are wealthy people. The effects of this crime will not effect them. Only everyday working MIDDLE CLASS will suffer when this bill passes. We must remove all the offenders from congress immediately. The first charge should be: treason against the American people who trusted these traitors to protect them!
    Please see who the traitor are:
    Senate Judiciary Committee Vote on S.744.
    Yes Votes No Votes
    Sen. Leahy (D-VT) Sen. Grassley (R-IA)
    Sen. Feinstein (D-CA) Sen. Sessions (R-AL)
    Sen. Schumer (D-NY) Sen. Cornyn (R-TX)
    Sen. Durbin (D-IL) Sen. Lee (R-TX)
    Sen. Whitehouse (D-RI) Sen. Cruz (R-TX)
    Sen. Klobuchar (D-MN)
    Sen. Franken (D-MN)
    Sen. Coons (D-DE)
    Sen. Blumenthal (D-CT)
    Sen. Hirono (D-HI)
    Sen. Hatch (R-UT)
    Sen. Graham (R-SC)
    Sen. Flake (R-AZ)

    • avatar

      Yes Sarah

      American is the most ethnically mixed nation on earth; yet the open border liars tell us unless we allow more wage degradation legal/illegal immigration overpopulation in, Real Legal Americans are racist. They even have the audacity to compare current illegal immigrants’ amnesty to the African American civil rights movement. What a bunch of liars.

    • avatar

      I have always asked why a lot of blacks are letting this be turned into a civil rights issue. Blacks were denied their rights for many years. That does not equate to people who are citizens of other countries who came here illegally. No one loses more than the working class and that is a whole lot of blacks in that class. Not to mention Latin gangs are driving out blacks from their long time homes in Los Angeles.

    • avatar

      Nicely put, Sarah! Thanks!
      I totally agree with your assessment and calling out the traitors and naming the patriots!

    • avatar

      You can see from the vote that the Dems dominate the committee, and they’re just looking to legitimize undocumented democrats (ILLEGAL ALIENS)./
      We should deport them all (the illegal aliens AND the democrats).

  5. avatar
    cynthia curran on

    This is true, its like Brookings Inst that wants a lot of legal immirgaiton. It treated construcation work as low skilled and low pay and factory work as high pay and high skilled. Constrcation has low skilled and low paid laborers but also high skilled and high paid machine operators. Unlike the Brookings report on poverty in the suburbs that blame it on just outsouced factory work, construcation could have been done by the native born where the wages would have been higher. There are fields like construcation and Meatpacking and othre jobs in the US that use to pay good but wages were driven down by immirgation. Something the Brookings Inst doesn’t want to explain in its worked on poverty growth in the suburbs.

  6. avatar
    Richard Bond on

    This is a typo

    which remains unlikely given that only 63.3% of working-age adults in the labor force are unemployed

    it should read

    which remains unlikely given that only 63.3% of working-age adults in the labor force are employed

  7. avatar

    This is quite simple. The American Action Network and American Enterprise Institute are both fronts for big business. They oppose workers rights and environmental laws. The are run by, and for, the wealthiest one percent in the country. It is not in the least surprising that they are in partnership with the US Chamber of Commerce. How any “liberals” can align themselves with this travesty is baffling, given their usual condemnations of these same corporations.

    And ANY assurances that amnestied illegals will be ineligible for federal benefits are worth the paper they are written on, which means they are worth nothing. Because if and when this is passed, La Raza and all the other professional ethnic groups will go into overdrive about how unfair it is that they should be denied benefits. Accompanied no doubt by arguments that “they pay taxes too”, when the fact is that few will make enough to be paying any income taxes AT ALL. And people like Senator Diane Feinstein will complain about what a burden this bill puts on California, when she is urging it’s passage. How hypocritical can you get.