Many on the right saw Obamacare as the President’s fulfillment on that promise to transform America into Europe. It wasn’t. The Schumer-Rubio immigration bill- S. 744 is. And it is much worse than Obamacare.
Critics argue that Obamacare increases dependency on the state, decreases the quality of medical care, and will end up raising our taxes. S. 744, goes far beyond that. It will negatively affect all areas of our nation’s political, economic, and cultural landscape for the foreseeable future.
Larry Pratt, the head of Gun Owners of America, puts it best; “it’s a matter of numbers, if you bring a whole bunch of Democrats into the country most of them are going to vote to take away our guns… we have a dog in that fight.”
Gun owners aren’t alone. Social conservatives who support traditional marriage and the sanctity of life, libertarians opposed to tax increases, Democrats who worry about decreasing wages, and progressives who fear an increasing economic inequality as well should be vehemently opposed to the Schumer-Rubio Amnesty.
For conservatives and libertarians, citizenship and the right to vote for millions of new poor immigrants from nations that have never been assimilated by a Western civilization the political impact will be devastating. The immigration bill will nearly triple the number immigration into this country over the decade.
It will only advance the Democrat majority and the liberal agenda.
Take into account, only one congressman who had a congressional district that bordered Mexico voted against Obamacare. With more Democrats come higher taxes, more regulation, and a greater demand for a “nanny state.” According to the Heritage Foundation, the average unlawful immigrant household takes in on average $14,000 more in welfare benefits than they pay in taxes – and that’s before the implementation of Obamacare.
The great Republican fantasy that passing amnesty will give the GOP a greater advantage with Hispanic voters is not only false, as proven by the decline in Hispanic voters in the two presidential elections after the 1986 amnesty, but also incredibly short sided.
Latin America will not be the great producer of low-wage workers in the 21st century. Most Latin American countries have seen their fertility levels plummet in the last decade, some like Brazil and Chile under replacement levels; Guatemala remains the only Latin American nation with an average fertility level of 3 or more children per female.
The next wave of cheap labor will have to come from Sub-Sahara Africa and the Muslim world. Nations like Mali, Niger, and Somalia have the highest fertility in the world and they will be the faces of the next great immigration wave.
For pro-labor Democrats the results from an onslaught of millions of new low-skilled and cheap labor immigrants will be devastating. Though economists have been arguing over the larger picture between wages and mass immigration there has been a general consensus that mass immigration has a negative effect on low-skilled labor, many high school dropouts.
One study by economists George Borjas and Lawrence Katz found that high school drops saw a six percent wage decrease, while another study by Michael Clemens, a senior fellow at the Center for Global Development, stated that wages decreased about one percent. Either way you cut, for the working poor who have already seen opportunities to join the middle class decreasing, mass immigration can be a death sentence.
Progressives who worry about the growing economic inequality, this will only worsen, as our nation takes in an estimated 33 million new immigrants in the first decade of the Schumer-Rubio reform. The growing wave of inequality due to the importing of millions from the third world has a possibility of increasing resentment along the lines of race and class.
There are a myriad of problems with the bill, it is filled with half promises and partial truths. But unlike Obamacare, it can never be repealed; its consequences will be devastating and permanent.
More Contributions From TheBlaze: