The Trillion Dollar Alien
It has proven to be one of the most unpopular Government Policies of all time: our open borders. By most estimates, nearly 10 million illegal aliens have crossed the U.S. Southern Border during the three and a half years of the Biden-Harris Administration.
How The Congressional Budget Office Turns A Liability Into A Political Positive
It has proven to be one of the most unpopular Government Policies of all time: our open borders. By most estimates, nearly 10 million illegal aliens have crossed the U.S. Southern Border during the three and a half years of the Biden-Harris Administration.
For Kamala Harris, the issue of immigration has become her number one obstacle in her trek to the White House. Most opinion polls suggest that over two-thirds of the American public consider this mass immigration to have a negative impact on the country, a costly drain on our economy at a time when we can ill afford it. If the Harris Campaign could turn the immigrant invasion into a positive, it would go a long way to securing Kamala’s presidency.
Enter the Congressional Budget Office.
The CBO is considered one of the premier Government research organizations. It is designed to provide Congress with objective, bipartisan research on the country’s financial position. Each year, Congressmen refer to the CBO’s budget projections to give a well-reasoned look into the future of every President’s Proposed Budget.
However, one can’t help but wonder if the CBO, like much of Washington, is being infected with “Potomac Fever, “ that not-so-rare disease that turns every question into a political one. After all, billions, sometimes trillions of dollars, ride on each Congressional vote.
With multi-trillion dollar budgets, the United States President has become the world’s most significant “customer” — sending billions of dollars to our allies, mandating the type of automobiles we’ll drive, and investing in novel medical procedures. Spending begins with the President, from Ukraine to Electric Vehicles to the COVID-19 Vaccines.
So, with that background, I was particularly interested to see the latest publication from the CBO, titled:
“Effects of Immigration Surge on the Federal Budget and the Economy”
You can find the report here:
https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/2024-07/60165-Immigration.pdf
The opening paragraph sets the terms of the study:
“The number of people entering the United States has increased sharply in recent years. Most of the increase comes from a surge in people whom the Congressional Budget Office categorizes as other foreign nationals…Based on pre-2020 trends, CBO would have expected the net immigration of people in that category to average around 200,000 per year.1 In the agency’s projections, the net immigration of other foreign nationals exceeds that rate by a total of 8.7 million people over the 2021–2026 period.”
Instead of the term “illegal alien,” the CBO uses the term “foreign national.”
The CBO also projects the number of new foreign nationals as 8.7 million plus 1 million (200k/year for five years), which is 9.7 million by 2026. However, most observers think that number has already been exceeded. Probably 10 million foreign nationals have come through the border since President Biden was inaugurated on January 20, 2021.
At the current rate, there would be nearly 20 million foreign nationals in the country by 2026. Admittedly, this is a difficult number to ascertain. However, the number of foreign nationals residing within our borders is critical in determining their contribution to the economy, either positive or negative. By low-balling their estimate, the CBO minimizes their impact.
We come then to the fundamental question: Are foreign Nationals a positive contribution or a negative expense for the country? Put another way, will these new immigrants become productive members of our society?
And here we come to the critical paragraph:
Education and Income.
On average, adults in the surge population are less educated than those in the general population in CBO’s projections. About half of the people age 16 or older in the surge population have only a high school education or less upon arrival… p. 9
Pay special attention to the category: “high school education or less.” No self-respecting social scientist would use such a broad category as this. What does it mean? In the United States, this category would likely be dominated by the “high school drop-out.” Someone who has received 8 to 10 years of education, has some basic skills in reading and arithmetic, can likely sign their name, and can operate a smartphone. While they may not have a high school diploma, they can function in today’s society.
That is probably not the case for many of the new foreign nationals who’ve come on board. These new immigrants are likely to have far less education than the equivalent American “less than high school.” This new CBO category is inherently misleading and much too broad to make any projections from.
The generally accepted category for people with limited education is: “Literate.” It’s the grouping that most social scientists, international organizations, and researchers use to categorize someone’s proficiency in basic skills such as reading and writing. Literacy is the key to determining someone’s economic future. Even without a “high school diploma,” someone who is literate may have a bright future. In contrast, someone who is illiterate would have a much more difficult time functioning in 21st-century America.
Literacy rates have been studied and followed for decades, and we have excellent data on each country’s literacy population. Here, we can clearly see some trends: In relatively homogeneous countries with advanced economies, literacy rates tend to be high. This includes many countries in Europe, Asia, and some of the Middle East. Countries like Japan, Korea, Poland, and Armenia have literacy rates of 100%.
Conversely, countries with struggling economies generally have poor literacy rates. Countries in this group include Pakistan (45% illiterate), Haiti (51% illiterate), and Afghanistan (51% illiterate).
There is a clear correlation between education and future economic success, and the CBO uses this correlation in this report. The CBO ASSUMES that the new foreign nationals will have the same economic future as native Americans. By lumping the illiterate in the broad category “no high school education,” they combine the American high school drop-out (literate) with the alien who cannot read or write (or even speak the language) (illiterate). The CBO has combined native-born Americans who are fully acculturated (speak the language, know the customs), reasonably literate, and adapted to our commercial systems with Foreign Nationals who no little or nothing about our culture, speak the language, or understand our commercial system. All are considered “non-high school educated.”
Therefore, the CBO uses the same projection for foreign nationals as for native-born ones. They thereby project that in a decade, these new members of society will contribute at the same rate as other Americans, ultimately contributing up to a trillion dollars in tax revenue, a specious argument at best.
If the CBO had used the more generally accepted Literate/Non-Literate criteria instead, its results would have been much different. Those the CBO projects to be taxpayers may instead be social-payment recipients. Thus, the study's premise, “that foreign nationals will contribute to the country’s economic prosperity,” becomes invalid.
Regrettably, this is likely not news to the Congressional Budget Office. I’ve come to the same conclusion as John Williams over at “Shadow Stats.” For many years, he’s been demonstrating that there is almost always a twist or “spin” to nearly every report our Government produces.
By changing a number here or there (10 million aliens instead of 20 million), adopting a new term, “Foreign National,” instead of “Illegal Alien,” or altering criteria, “high school education” for “literacy,” these agencies can influence elections, and move the direction of the country.
**