May 9, 2007, T. Willard Fair, president and CEO of the Urban League of Greater Miami, in testimony before the Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law of the House Judiciary Committee began his statement by saying, “Black men are much more likely to be unemployed than white men, more likely to be dropouts, in prison, in poverty, or dead. There are many reasons for grim statistics like this, including the continuing effects of slavery and Jim Crow; the shift in economy away from manufacturing; broken schools in our big cities; the glorification of self-destructive behavior by popular culture. But one factor is too often ignored – mass immigration.”
While I vehemently disagree with his first reason – and can point to readily available workable solutions to his next three reasons – it is his last reason, when weighed in balance pursuant to the population group referenced and the state of same, that is most damning. It is the 10-ton pink elephant in the middle of the room that no one is willing to acknowledge.
The two groups that will, without question, suffer the greatest injury if Congress caves in to the convoluted desire of President Bush and passes an immigration bill that allows for amnesty and guest workers are the middle class and black males.
Robert Rector of the Heritage Foundation points out the following: “Our research shows that low-skill immigrants’ households, on average, receive $30,160 per year in government benefits while paying $10,573 in taxes, creating a net fiscal deficit of $19,587. The total net cost to the taxpayers of low-skilled immigrant households comes to $89 billion per annum. (“Setting the Record – and Research – Straight: Heritage Responds (again) to the Wall Street Journal”; June 12, 2007)
Three addendums to Rector’s point: First, as he noted in the above article, those numbers are based on “the fiscal costs of households headed by immigrants without a high school degree (i.e., low-skilled immigrants), which currently comprise one-third of all immigrant households.” Next, his numbers are based on legal immigrants; and lastly, those numbers can be discarded when illegal immigrants are factored in. Another point worth mentioning is that, while the numbers Bush and his acolytes throw out for public consumption claim 12 million illegals, in truth the most accurate representations are 20-24 million illegals that we know about.
Regardless of how liberals are wont to spin the facts, the upper class and ridiculously wealthy pay more than their fair share of taxes. The lower class pays virtually nothing in taxes, especially after factoring in earned income tax credits and the like. It is the middle class that is, and will be, disproportionately burdened (read penalized) if Americans allow Bush and Congress to pass an amnesty bill.
Such a bill would have an even more debilitating effect on black males. While it is repeatedly regurgitated that they are disaffected disproportionately – and while I am unapologetic in my opinion that they must bear the greater weight of responsibility for this reality – one can no less deny it is a fact.
Even in Historic Black Colleges and Universities, or HBCU, black males age 24 or younger represent the largest gender gap among racial groups attending college. While women as a group comprise 60 percent of all college enrollees, among HBCUs they comprise, in many instances, an even higher percentage.
What does this mean – what does it portend? It means the middle class standard of life will be mercilessly diminished. It means black males (their own fault notwithstanding) can now add illegal immigration and the proposed rewarding of same to guns, drugs and prison as a threat to their ability to compete for meaningful employment.
Factor in the genocidal effect of abortion on the black community and it doesn’t take genius to understand that the future of these two groups becomes bleak.
If America can be likened to a house, I submit we must first get our home in order before inviting in permanent guests. And even at that, I advocate limiting the number of guests, with weight given to ability. The middle class already suffers from the ever-increasing burden of paying for the lifestyle decisions of the poor. Black males suffer in no small part to incredibly poor decision-making. An illegal amnesty bill would not only exacerbate these existing problems – it would do so for generations, if not permanently.
It is time for members of Congress like Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., (as I am told by a highly credible source who witnessed the incident) to stop cursing her constituents who seek audience with her to discuss the impact of illegals on the black community. I submit she and Jesse Jackson would better serve their communities by holding hands with those who oppose amnesty than by doing the same with illegal-immigrant activists in a sordid show of solidarity.
As Monroe Anderson pointed out, “[Based on] data from the 1960-2000 U.S. census reports, researchers discovered a strong correlation between immigration, black wages, black employment rates and black incarceration rates.” (“Immigration hurts blacks”; June 3, 2007) To which I add, while immigration impacts blacks, illegals affect all unskilled and poorly educated, regardless of skin color – the disproportionate effect on black males notwithstanding.
Paraphrasing Fair’s closing statement to the House Committee, The interests of the [middle class] and black Americans are clear: no amnesty, no guest workers, enforce the immigration law.
Related special offer: