Connect with us

News

Ann Coulter Exposes the Real Costs of Mass Migration

Published

on

Ann Coulter sets the record straight on immigration.

In a column for The Hill, she exposes the high costs of mass migration.

Many advocates of open borders argue that cheap labor is necessary for an economy to function. However, that cheap labor comes at a steep cost.

Trending: HMM: Michelle Obama was Desperate Not to be Photographed in a Bikini as First Lady

Coulter cites a Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) study in 2017 revealing that illegal immigrants “cost the American taxpayer — on net — $116 billion a year.”

take our poll - story continues below

Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense?

  • VOTE NOW: Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense when he shot three BLM rioters? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

The conservative commentator points out that the number presented by FAIR may actually be a conservative estimate. She argues that “the actual number is more likely triple that.”

Coulter contends that the 12.5 million illegal immigrants that FAIR based its study is a gross underestimate. She says “The 12 million figure is based on the self-reports of illegal aliens to U.S. census questionnaires.”

That being said, more “serious studies” estimate that these numbers are much higher. At one end of the spectrum, “Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Yale study last year put the number of illegals at 22 million.” A Bear Stearns investment bank study placed it “at 20 million back in 2005.”

However, other studies show a much larger illegal immigrant figure. Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative reporters Donald L. Barlett and James B. Steele found that “3 million illegals were crossing each year — so simple math would put it at well over 60 million today.”

Based on these numbers, Coulter argues that the FAIR study underestimates the costs of illegal immigration “by at least a factor of three”, which puts the real cost to “about $350 billion a year.”

Coulter also alluded to other studies that demonstrate the steeps costs of mass migration. The Heritage Foundation’s Robert Rector found that under America’s government redistribution system, households led by illegal immigrants received $14,387 more in government services than they paid in taxes. Legal immigrants also received $4,344 more in government services than they paid in taxes. This study assumes that the number of illegal immigrants has stayed the same since the Bush era.

Coulter also points out other hidden costs such as increased crime rates and drug smuggling that has contributed to the opioid epidemic as some of the socially detrimental aspects of mass migration.

All in all, mass migration has steep costs that most in Washington D.C. refuse to acknowledge.

Big League National Security

Will Josh Hawley be the Next Champion for an America First Foreign Policy?

America First May Have its Next Leader to End Wars Abroad

Published

on

Does America First have a new non-interventionist champion?

Missouri Senator Josh Hawley has been viewed by many as one of the figures who could potentially lead a Trumpist movement after Trump, should Joe Biden end up being installed as president on January 2021.

Hawley has made a name for himself as a champion of Middle America and questioning the neoliberal orthodoxy on immigration and trade. Lately, Hawley has made a pivot towards  questioning the interventionist conventional wisdom on foreign policy. 

In early October of this year, the Missouri Senator called for the American government to withdraw troops from Afghanistan. Hawley tweeted, “Almost 20 years now in Afghanistan. Long past time to draw this war to an end.”

take our poll - story continues below

Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense?

  • VOTE NOW: Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense when he shot three BLM rioters? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Hawley’s foreign policy has been a work progress over the past two years. During a 2019 speech Hawley gave at the Center for a New American Security (CNAS), he questioned the nation-building policy prescriptions of previous administrations, demonstrating some degree of skepticism towards non-stop interventionism abroad on the part of the Senator.

That said, it remains to be seen if Hawley’s legislative record will fully match his rhetoric.

Hawley is a staunch China hawk, who fears the rise of China and is a strong voice against China’s expansionist efforts. Hawley’s track record shows that his foreign policy views are rough around the edges. Daniel Larison of The American Conservative is not as optimistic about Hawley judging by his votes on the Yemeni Civil War. Larison cited several of Hawley’s votes that may be cause for concern:

Sen. Hawley voted against the Senate’s resolution of disapproval that opposed the president’s effort to circumvent Congress with a bogus “emergency” to expedite arms sales to Saudi Arabia and the UAE. More important, he voted with the president and most Senate Republicans against the antiwar Yemen resolution that would have cut off all U.S. support to the Saudi coalition.”

Nevertheless, Hawley’s comments on Afghanistan are a good sign that Hawley is catching on to the fact that Americans are tired of foreign wars. Politicians can change their views and behaviors. Hawley is likely recognizing that the America First movement is exhausted by the endless wars and wants candidates and elected officials who offer withdrawal plans. 

After looking at the list of people who have been tapped to join the Biden administration, Hawley tweeted, “What a group of corporatists and war enthusiasts – and #BigTech sellouts.”

Journalist Glenn Greenwald, a fierce interventionist skeptic, maintained cautious optimism about Hawley. In a tweet, he commented, “All kinds of reasons to be skeptical of the authenticity here, but — purely as a matter of rhetoric — just imagine any national Republican speaking this way about a Dem administration even 10 years ago. The framework of politics is radically shifting.”

The jury is still out on Hawley. Regardless of flaws in his voting record, America First advocates should continue to push him and other America First leaning Republicans in the right direction. We should never forget that politicians are still receptive to political pressure and the grassroots holds the keys to political change. 

Young senators like Hawley are the future of American politics and it makes sense for foreign policy restrainers to lobby them and push them in a direction that favors non-interventionism.

Continue Reading
It's time to name Antifa a terror org! Sign your petition now!


Trending