The RAISE Act Will Save America Trillions in Government Handouts Over the Next Decade

According to research compiled by Robert Rector, The Heritage Foundation’s senior research fellow on domestic policy, the RAISE Act could save America trillions of dollars in welfare, healthcare, and other social services over the coming decades.

The RAISE Act would manage this ending chain migration, which could reduce overall immigration levels by up to 50%, and by prioritizing immigrants who have economically valuable skills, which would be determined according to an objective points-based system.

Before getting into the numbers, it is worth exploring what chain migration is, and why it is of particular concern. The Heritage Foundation sums it up nicely:

Chain migration starts with a foreign citizen who is given a green card. This individual is allowed to bring in his or her nuclear family consisting of a spouse and minor children.

Once the original immigrant and his or her spouse become U.S. citizens, they can petition for their parents, adult sons and daughters, and adult siblings and brothers and sisters-in-law to also enter.

This second group can bring their minor children. Once they become citizens, the brothers and sisters in law and parents can petition for their siblings, in-laws, and parents to legally enter the U.S.

Essentially, chain migration is something of a loophole, whereby the first immigrant can eventually bring his entire family into America, even if they lack the ability to enter the country on merit. This is part of the reason why so many communities slowly turn into immigrant enclaves: people naturally settle in the same places as their family.

And just to be clear, the number of people entering the country in this way is enormous: 400,000 people enter America every year because of chain migration—that is, roughly 40% of all legal immigrants.

The RAISE Act would end chain migration entirely.

Low Skilled Immigrants are a Tax Burden on American Citizens

The crux of the Heritage Foundation’s argument against mass immigration is that most of the immigrants who arrive in America via non-economic channels are, not surprisingly, not economically viable. That is, they consume far more in government services than they consume.

In fact, it is estimated that low-skilled immigrants (those without a high school degree) receive $4 in government benefits for every $1 they pay in taxes.

This is because America’s tax system is progressive (redistributive), meaning that it taxes people with lower incomes less, and provides them with a host of benefits. Therefore, those with few skills (and meager earnings), end up consuming far more in government benefits than they pay in tax

Measuring the economic consequences of this redistribution is difficult, but a report published by the National Academy of Sciences called The Economic and Fiscal Consequences of Immigration attempted to do just that.

The report looked at both legal and illegal immigrants, and considered variables such as:

…routine government services such as police and fire protection, highways and sewers; public education costs; benefits from over 80 means-tested welfare programs such as Medicaid, food stamps, the earned income tax credit, and housing vouchers; and other government direct benefits including Social Security, Medicare, and Unemployment Insurance. and included in its analysis considerations of “taxes paid at the federal, state, and local levels, including personal income taxes, FICA taxes, sales taxes, excise taxes, property, and business taxes.” Basically, the report was comprehensive, and left few stones unturned (although it did fail to take into account remittance payments, which can be significant).