Immigrants built America, saved Americans from the coronavirus disease, and are responsible for landing NASA’s latest spaceship on Mars, U.S. President Joe Biden told a group of new immigrants during their naturalization ceremony.
“Folks, you know, its dreams of immigrants like you that built America and continue to inject new energy, new vitality, new — a new strength,” Biden told the immigrants during a June 2 event at the White House. “We’ve seen that most clearly during this pandemic, with immigrants as frontline workers and as scientists and researchers on the frontlines of finding vaccines.”
“Immigration has always been essential to America,” he insisted.
The casual insults of Americans and their children as inadequate are commonplace in the capital city of Americans’ homeland, which is often described as a “nation of immigrants” by pro-migration businesses and political groups.
In his speech, Biden also credited immigrants with helping to fulfill the high goals of the Declaration of Independence:
We were founded on an idea that, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men [and women] are created equal … endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights … Life, Liberty, [and] the pursuit of Happiness” … as I said, since our nation’s founding, the quintessential idea in America has been nurtured and enriched and advanced by the contributions and sacrifices of so many people — almost all of whom were immigrants.
Biden also claimed that immigrants were responsible for NASA’s newest exploration mission to Mars: “The team was made up of immigrants who told me they grew up looking at the stars — literally, not a joke; I’m not making this up. That’s what they told me in our conversation.”
Biden even thanked the migrants for moving into the United States: “So I want to thank you all for choosing us, and I mean that sincerely. Thank you for choosing the United States of America, believing that America is worthy of your aspirations, worthy of your dreams.”
Alejandro Mayorkas, Biden’s border chief, also attended the same naturalization ceremony for 21 individuals. Immigration “is what makes America great,” said Maytorkas in a tweeted dismissal of 285 million Americans. Mayorkas is an immigration zealot and is himself an immigrant who arrived from Cuba at age one.
In reality, 285 million Americans and their American culture make America great — and they are usefully aided by contributions from roughly 35 million legal immigrants and at least 12 million illegal migrants.
From the 1840s onward, waves of European immigrants flooded into the emerging industrial economy. Their manual labor helped provide a cornucopia of goods, including rivers of cheap autos from Detroit factories in the early 1900s. But public pressure forced Congress to sharply reduce migration in 1924.
The number of new immigrants was 800,000 in 1921 — but it quickly dropped by more than 90 percent, to just 29,000 in 1934 and 39,000 in 1945.
After the doors were mostly closed in 1925, the population of immigrant Americans dropped from 14 million in 1920 to 9.6 million in 1970 — and Americans’ inventions, productivity, and wealth boomed during this low-migration period.
According to PBS, U.S. investors and companies rolled out the television in 1927, frozen food in 1929, radio astronomy in 1931, the defibrillator in 1932, ski lifts in 1937, nylon in 1938, the first digital computer in 1939, the atomic bomb in 1945, suburbia in 1947, the electric guitar in 1948, the first commercial computer in 1951, the polio vaccine in 1957, the compute chip in 1959, the laser in 1960, the idea for the Internet and the actual moon landing in 1969, the fiber-optic cable in 1970, the video game in 1972, and much more.
In the same low-migration period, Americans saved Europe and Russia from the Nazis, released Asia from Japan’s cruelty, restarted the world economy, slashed the child death rate with new antibiotics, created suburbia and the automobile economy, helped women gain a measure of independence, helped black Americans migrate into northern jobs, built a worldwide commercial culture, and moved the nation’s commerce into space.
Americans enjoyed a massive rise in prosperity as a broad new middle class emerged from Americans’ industrial economy. Family income doubled between 1950 and 1970, according to the left-wing Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
But after Congress reopened the doors for immigration, family income stalled, rising only one-quarter from 1980 to 2020.
Pro-migration groups began claiming in 1955 the United States was not a nation of settlers and pioneers but really was a “Nation of Immigrants.” They made that claim even though immigrants were only seven percent of the population in 1955, down from 15 percent in 1910.
Joe Biden was born in 1942 and spent his younger years in a nation with very few migrants.
Migration slowly rose after World War II because Congress welcomed people fleeing communism. For example, Hungarian migrants fleeting the Soviet invasion helped bump new arrivals to 327,000 in 1957.
But Congress loosened immigration rules with the 1965 immigration bill.
In 1965, 306,000 new migrants arrived under the modified 1924 rules. Twenty years after the 1965 immigration law, 568,000 immigrants arrived, according to the Migration Policy Institute. During this 1965 to 1985 period, the percentage of legal immigrants in the United States rose by one percentage point, from five percent to six percent, according to the institute.
During this 1965 to 1985 period, U.S. astronauts went to the Moon, American scientists developed the technology for the Internet, and Americans overwhelmed the Soviet Union.
A big jump in migration happened after President Ronald Reagan approved amnesty in 1986, helping to add 1.8 million legal immigrants in 1991.
But the real jump came after President George H.W. Bush worked with Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA) to double the annual inflow of migrants from 1990. Their 1990 law now delivers roughly one million legal immigrants each year, or roughly one immigrant for every four American births.
The number of resident immigrants in the United States rose from just ten million in 1970, then to 20 million in 1990, and up to 45 million in 2019.
Immigration benefits the United States with a bigger economy of many consumers, workers, homeowners, and inventors. These immigrants collectively help expand the nation’s wealth stored in house prices, patents, and stock market funds.
Immigration also provides more taxes to federal tax collectors and delivers more poor people for government agencies to help. And it provides more civic chaos and diversity for politicians who promise solutions to the problems they help create.
Many polls show that the public’s quiet opposition to labor migration emerges whenever people are asked about the scale and economics of migration, such as the impact on housing prices in Los Angeles.
A wide variety of pollsters have shown deep and broad opposition to labor migration and the inflow of temporary contract workers into jobs sought by young U.S. graduates. This opposition is multiracial, cross-sex, non-racist, class-based, bipartisan, rational, persistent, and recognizes the solidarity Americans owe to each other.
Migration moves wealth from employees to employers, from families to investors, from young to old, from children to their parents, from homebuyers to investors, from technology to stoop labor, from red states to blue states, and from the central states to the coastal states such as New York.
State and Local Politicians Move to Grant Coronavirus Relief to Illegal Aliens
By Matthew Tragesser
ImmigrationReform.com
https://www.immigrationreform.com/2020/04/08/illegal-alien-benefits-states-immigrationreform-com/
Study: More than 7-in-10 California Immigrant
Welfare
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2018/12/04/study-more-than-7-in-10-california-immigrant-households-are-on-welfare/
More than 7-in-10 households headed by immigrants in the state of California are on taxpayer-funded welfare, a new study reveals.
The latest Census Bureau data analyzed by the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) finds that about 72 percent of households headed by noncitizens and immigrants use one or more forms of taxpayer-funded welfare programs in California — the number one immigrant-receiving state in the U.S.
Meanwhile, only about 35 percent of households headed by native-born Americans use welfare in California.
All four states with the largest foreign-born populations, including California, have extremely high use of welfare by immigrant households. In Texas, for example, nearly 70 percent of households headed by immigrants use taxpayer-funded welfare. Meanwhile, only about 35 percent of native-born households in Texas are on welfare.
In New York and Florida, a majority of households headed by immigrants and noncitizens are on welfare. Overall, about 63 percent of immigrant households use welfare while only 35 percent of native-born households use welfare.
President Trump’s administration is looking to soon implement a policy that protects American taxpayers’ dollars from funding the mass importation of welfare-dependent foreign nationals by enforcing a “public charge” rule whereby legal immigrants would be less likely to secure a permanent residency in the U.S. if they have used any forms of welfare in the past, including using Obamacare, food stamps, and public housing.
The immigration controls would be a boon for American taxpayers in the form of an annual $57.4 billion tax cut — the amount taxpayers spend every year on paying for the welfare, crime, and schooling costs of the country’s mass importation of 1.5 million new, mostly low-skilled legal immigrants.
As Breitbart News reported, the majority of the more than 1.5 million foreign nationals entering the country every year use about 57 percent more food stamps than the average native-born American household. Overall, immigrant households consume 33 percent more cash welfare than American citizen households and 44 percent more in Medicaid dollars. This straining of public services by a booming 44 million foreign-born population translates to the average immigrant household costing American taxpayers $6,234 in federal welfare.
John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder.
Study: Amnesty Will Cost ‘Hundreds of Billions’
NEIL MUNRO
President Joe Biden’s amnesty plan will spike Social Security spending by “hundreds of billions” over the next few decades, according to a forecast by the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS).
The February 22 report, titled “Amnesty Would Cost the Social Security and Medicare Trust Funds Hundreds of Billions of Dollars,” says:
The new taxes paid by the average amnesty recipient amount to only half of the $94,500 noted above. The net effect of amnesty is therefore $140,330 [in Social Security benefits] minus $47,250 [in paid taxes], which is about $93,000 per recipient. In any large-scale amnesty, in which millions of illegal immigrants gain legal status, it is easy to see how the net cost could reach into the hundreds of billions of dollars.
The predicted $93,000 per person cost would be a financial burden for taxpayers — but would be a giveaway to business groups because the Social Security payments will be converted into purchases of consumer products, healthcare services, medical drugs, apartments, and food.
At least 11 million people — perhaps 20 million — are living illegally in the United States. The number rises as people overstay their visas, evade deportation orders, or sneak over the border — but it also falls as some migrants get deported, leave, or find ways to get green cards via the rolling “Adjustment of Status” process.
But taxpayers’ expenses are also economic gains for business groups and investors. In January 2020, a coalition of business groups sued deputies for President Donald Trump after he reduced the inflow of poor migrants into the U.S. consumer market, saying:
Because [green-card applicants] will receive fewer public benefits under the Rule, they will cut back their consumption of goods and services, depressing demand throughout the economy …
The New American Economy Research Fund calculates that, on top of the $48 billion in income that is earned by individuals who will be affected by the Rule—and that will likely be removed from the U.S. economy—the Rule will cause an indirect economic loss of more than $33.9 billion … Indeed, the Fiscal Policy Institute has estimated that the decrease in SNAP and Medicaid enrollment under the Rule could, by itself, lead to economic ripple effects of anywhere between $14.5 and $33.8 billion, with between approximately 100,000 and 230,000 jobs lost … Health centers alone would be forced to drop as many as 6,100 full-time medical staff.
CIS promised a more detailed report:
This is just a rough estimate. We are currently working on a detailed model that will provide more precise costs for both Social Security and Medicare. Again, however, any reasonable calculation will produce a large cost, simply because amnesty will convert so many outside contributors into actual beneficiaries.
For years, a wide variety of pollsters have shown deep and broad opposition to labor migration and to the inflow of temporary contract workers into jobs sought by young U.S. graduates.
The multiracial, cross-sex, non-racist, class-based, intra-Democratic, and solidarity-themed opposition to labor migration coexists with generally favorable personal feelings toward legal immigrants and toward immigration in theory — despite the media magnification of many skewed polls and articles that still push the 1950’s corporate “Nation of Immigrants” claim.
The deep public opposition is built on the widespread recognition that migration moves money from employees to employers, from families to investors, from young to old, from children to their parents, from homebuyers to real estate investors, and from the central states to the coastal states.
However, Biden’s officials have been broadcasting their desire to change border policies to help extract more migrants from Central America for the U.S. economy. On February 19, for example, deputies of DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas posted a tweet offering support to migrants illegally working in the United States and to migrants who may wish to live in the United States.
We'll get 1 million-plus Biden migrants this year, warns ex-Obama/DHS official now at Harvard.
The warning includes a weak criticism of the ethnic lobbies & open-borders progressives who are undermining an Ivy League giveaway in the amnesty bill.#H1B https://t.co/RqZBEGcxKO
— Neil Munro (@NeilMunroDC) February 22, 2021
Biden’s HHS Nominee Does Not Rule Out Taxpayer-Funded Healthcare for Illegal Aliens
JOHN BINDER
President Joe Biden’s nominee to lead the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, dodged a question on whether he would push to provide American taxpayer-funded healthcare benefits to illegal aliens.
This week, during a hearing before the Senate Finance Committee, Becerra was asked by Senator Steve Daines (R-MT) about his previous support for decriminalizing illegal immigration and providing illegal aliens with taxpayer-funded healthcare benefits.
Becerra, though, dodged the question by saying he would follow the parameters of the Affordable Care Act, commonly known as Obamacare, which he said allows “very rare” cases of illegal aliens to receive benefits.
The exchange went as follows:
DAINES: You’re on record for pushing for allowing illegal immigrants to receive taxpayer-funded healthcare and for decriminalizing illegal entry into the United States. This coupled with President Biden’s radical plan for granting citizenship to those who are here illegally would potentially lead to hundreds of thousands, if not potentially millions, more people flooding into our country. [Emphasis added]
As you know, in 2016, California passed a law requiring covered Californians to apply for … waivers to allow illegal immigrants to purchase health insurance in the marketplace. This waiver was withdrawn after President Trump’s election. [Emphasis added]
My question is this: Will you attempt to use the waiver authority contained in the Affordable Care Act to grant healthcare benefits to illegal immigrants? [Emphasis added]
BECERRA: Senator, I can tell you that where the law, as it stands now as I see it, it does not allow those who are unauthorized in this country to receive taxpayer-paid benefits except in very rare circumstances and it will be my job to make sure that we are following and enforcing the law. And I can commit to you that that is what we will do. [Emphasis added]
In a letter to Biden, 11 Senate Republicans and 64 House Republicans asked the president to withdraw Becerra’s nomination to be HHS Secretary, citing his support for taxpayer-funded healthcare benefits for illegal aliens, among other issues.
“Mr. Becerra seeks to decriminalize illegal immigration, which would extend expensive government benefits like Medicaid to anyone who illegally crosses our borders,” the letter states.
A Politico report this week suggested Becerra is eyeing plans to provide illegal aliens with taxpayer-funded healthcare benefits should he lead HHS.
“He’s one of those individuals that had exceedingly deep convictions about the need to cover the undocumented individuals in all of our communities,” former Rep. Charles Gonzalez (D-TX) told Politico of Becerra.
Should Becerra become HHS Secretary, he could let illegal aliens onto Obamacare exchanges while pressuring states to pursue similar policies to those in California. Likewise, Becerra could open Obamacare exchanges to particular subgroups of illegal aliens, like those enrolled in the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program.
As Breitbart News reported, forcing taxpayers to provide healthcare to all illegal aliens would cost citizens anywhere between $23 billion to $66 billion every single year — potentially a $660 billion bill for taxpayers every decade, without adjusting for inflation and the increasing number of illegal aliens.
Cost is only the first issue facing taxpayers. Medical experts have admitted providing healthcare to illegal aliens would ensure a never-ending flood of illegal aliens arriving at the southern border with “serious health problems” and local hospitals would have to cover the costs.
Already, taxpayers are forced to subsidize about $18.5 billion of yearly medical costs for illegal aliens living in the U.S., according to estimates by Chris Conover, formerly of the Center for Health Policy and Inequalities Research at Duke University.
When U.S. voters were polled by CNN on the issue in July 2019, nearly 6-in-10 said they were opposed to such a policy, including 63 percent of swing voters and 61 percent of self-described “moderates.”
John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Email him at jbinder@breitbart.com. Follow him on Twitter here.
No comments:
Post a Comment