17. What is your definition of the term amnesty as applied to illegal immigration?

Most people think of amnesty as the removal of any penalty for wrongdoing, which would be wrong in the context of illegal immigration. In my opinion, illegal immigrants should pay a substantial penalty for having broken the law — either a financial penalty or by having to meet very strict requirements in order to remain in the country to work. The 1986 "amnesty" program did not include such penalties or requirements, and I opposed that program and would have voted against it if I had been in Congress at the time. The 1986 "amnesty" program also did not include a requirement of proof of statements made in the amnesty application and we did not have the database and computers then that we have now to check on the contributions of applicants to society.

18. What are the economic impacts of illegal immigration, good and bad, and what are your sources for your information?

Story continues below

There are no benefits from illegal immigration that could not be captured with a workable legal immigration program. However, illegal immigration is today helping to meet a very real demand for labor in some segments of the economy. Also, it is clear that many illegal immigrants in the work force are paying significant amounts of taxes, both Social Security and income taxes. Given that those workers will not realize Social Security benefits, and may not be filing for refunds they would otherwise receive, those tax payments do represent something of a subsidy to other taxpayers and to the Social Security system.

Given that hard data regarding illegal immigrants is difficult to acquire, we must depend upon estimates for the numbers we use regarding economic impacts. However, there are reputable economists who appreciate the net benefit of immigration, much of which is illegal and always has been.

For example: In July of 2001, Federal Reserve Board Chairman Alan Greenspan testified before Congress that immigrants, including illegal immigrants, in essence donate $27 billion to local and state economies. This is the difference between what they pay in taxes ($70 billion) and what they use in services ($43 billion). Here is a direct quote: "There are great misperceptions that immigrants are a drain on our economy, but many studies have confirmed that the opposite is true. Even undocumented workers — commonly referred to as 'illegal' — contribute more than their fair share to our great country."

One of the studies Greenspan referred to was done by economists at the University of Indiana, who found that the overwhelming majority of undocumented workers "do not receive any assistance under government safety-net programs." And the National Academy of Sciences and National Research Council concluded that, in 1997, the U.S. reaped a $50 billion surplus from taxes paid by immigrants to all levels of government.

These findings do not justify illegal immigration, but they do demonstrate that much of the rhetoric surrounding this issue is distorted.

19. The nation does appear to be facing a coming shortage of workers. How should America deal with that? Is a program for recognizing illegal immigrants the right way to do it?

The way to deal with it is by a workable program allowing U.S. employers to use legal, temporary workers where domestic workers are not available. That is what I have proposed in the area of agriculture workers.