Criticizing the Heritage Foundation's Critics

Most of the criticism directed at the Heritage Foundation's  findings that if S.744 passed it would eventually cost American taxpayers $6.3 trillion focuses on its methodology. The facts behind researcher Robert Rector's analysis, however, have yet to be challenged.

Is Rector correct when he says that low-skilled, illegal immigrants without high school diplomas will have little if any positive impact on the American economy? Critics don’t have any evidence (because there is none) that legalized illegal immigrants with little education will perform better than native-born Americans with the same limited schooling. [Conservative Leaders Slam Heritage for Shoddy Immigration Study, by Jennifer Rubin, Washington Post, May 6, 2013]

In 1986, during the Immigration Reform and Control Act amnesty, I taught English as a Second Language in California to adults, predominantly Mexican migrant farm workers. One of the mandatory conditions of getting their green card was that they had to spend 40-hours studying English. During a two-year period, literally thousands of illegal immigrants came to class. For several reasons, only a tiny handful improved their limited English. First, 40-hours is too little time to master a foreign language. Second, even though they were adults with families, for many it was their first time in a classroom. Third, they had distractions in their lives that prevented them from studying outside the classroom.

My ESL experiences were life-altering. I had been a Wall Street investment banker before I grew disenchanted and pursued a different, more personally rewarding career. Most of the Mexican immigrants were then and are now good people.

But despite their good character, the overwhelming majority of those migrants did not have any special skills either in language or work ability that would enable them to escape poverty. The demographic profile of today’s illegal immigrant is the same as it was 25-years ago. To expect that any save a small handful will prosper and become major tax contributors is wishful thinking.

Two more things about the Heritage study. First, some skeptics say that the $6.3 trillion cost is misleading because most of it would be incurred several decades down the line. Assuming that’s true, all it means is that my children and grandchildren will have to absorb the expense—not comforting. Second, for the sake of debate, let’s agree that $6.3 trillion is a high-end estimate. But even if Heritage'smath is off by 100 percent, that leaves a still-staggering $3.1 trillion cost.

Congress must be realistic about how many immigrants the nation can accept. The United States already has 50 million people (20 percent children) living below the poverty line, the highest number since the Census Bureau began publishing statistics more than half a century ago. Giving work authorization to the existing 11 million illegal immigrants and issuing hundreds of thousands of low-skilled worker visas would devastate struggling, underemployed Americans. [U.S. Sees Highest Poverty Spike since 1960s, Associated Press, April 6, 2013]