[Congressional Record Volume 159, Number 87 (Tuesday, June 18, 2013)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4620-S4621]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                           IMMIGRATION REFORM

  Mr. FLAKE. Madam President, there are many reasons given to enact 
immigration reform. Being from Arizona, we bear a disproportionate 
burden in the State from the Federal Government's failure to have a 
secure border and to have a rational immigration system.
  There are many reasons, but the fiscal reason isn't often brought up. 
We were just given good fiscal reason today by the Congressional Budget 
Office that came forward with their estimate for the cost of the 
legislation.
  Just a few minutes ago we heard the ``glass half empty'' speech, and 
I want to give the ``glass half full''--or actually, decidedly more 
than that. Let me take a few of the top-line numbers.
  First, we are often told that if we enact this legislation, the 
increase in population of those who come across--illegally or legally--
in the next 10 years will be some 30 million people. That is disputed 
by the facts on the ground. But also CBO points out in their estimate 
that by 2023, enacting S. 744 would lead to a net increase of 10.4 
million in the number of people residing in the United States compared 
to the number of people projected under current law. So it is 
significantly lower.
  The best estimate we have of the illegal population here is around 11 
million. This would also lead to a substantial decrease in the illegal 
population obviously coming across. So we are looking at an increased 
population of about 10.4 million over 10 years, decidedly lower than 
some of the estimates that are being thrown around.
  Let's talk about a few of the fiscal numbers. We are told it would be 
extremely costly to enact this legislation. CBO says the following: 
This will lead to an increase in Federal direct spending of $262 
billion over the 2014-2033 period. Most of these outlays will be for 
increases in refundable tax credits, and on and on. So $262 billion in 
increased spending sounds significant, until you consider that this 
legislation will increase Federal revenues by $459 billion over the 
2014-2033 period. So $459 billion in increased revenue compared against 
$262 billion in increased spending. That is a $197 billion surplus--or 
decrease in the deficit--over the 10-year budget window.
  We often hear: That is OK for the first 10 years, but what happens 
after that? CBO looked at that as well, and they said this: On balance, 
CBO and JCT--Joint Committee on Taxation--estimate that the changes in 
direct spending in revenue would decrease Federal budget deficits by 
about $700 billion, or 0.02 percent, of the gross domestic product, 
over the period 2024 to 2033. Again, CBO and JCT estimate the changes 
in direct spending revenue will decrease Federal spending deficits by 
about $700 billion over the second 10-year budget window.
  I know we often point out on this side of the aisle and the other 
side of the aisle as well these reports are only as good as the 
assumptions you make when you do these reports. Duly noted. But I think 
it is still instructive to look at this and dispel some of the wild 
rumors that are out there about the cost of this legislation, when CBO 
actually comes forward and says over a 20-year budget window, there 
will be a $700 billion decrease in Federal deficits. That is 
significant.
  Let me also say CBO looked at how this legislation would affect the 
economy going forward. They looked at a further budget window. They say 
S. 744 would boost economic output, taking into account all economic 
effects including those reflected in the cost estimates. Again, they 
are talking about the direct spending that would increase through parts 
of this legislation as well. If you take that into account, still this 
bill would increase real inflation-adjusted GDP relative to the amount 
CBO projects under current law by 3.3 percent in 2023 and 5.4 percent 
in 2033--again, increasing economic activity by 3.3 percent in 2023 and 
by 5.4 percent in 2033. That is substantial.
  When you look at the legislation and you look at what will happen 
when we increase legal immigration in ways that help the economy, 
particularly on the H-1B side--high-tech STEM visas--we all know 
intuitively that will help

[[Page S4621]]

us, because those individuals who come with these kinds of degrees 
boost economic output and increase jobs. It is going to help this 
economy, and this spells it out in dramatic fashion: 3.3 percent 
increase in 2023 simply owing to this legislation, 5.4 percent in 2033 
just owing to this legislation.
  In summary, I want to say CBO estimates are only as good as the 
assumptions they make. But when they look at this legislation in a 
dispassionate way, as nonpartisan as they can get, they come up with 
figures that show net revenue over expenses is quite substantial--over 
$700 billion over a 20-year budget window--and the economic output 
would increase 3.3 percent by 2023 and 5.4 percent by 2033. That is 
significant and I think it bears noting.
  Madam President, I yield the floor.

                          ____________________