Subject: Nightly, 5.4
From: "Kasnetz, Joel" <[email-masked]>
To: "Bauer, Nick" <[email-masked]>, "Dillon, Lauren" <[email-masked]>, "Graham, Caroline" <[email-masked]>, Veepstakes <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 4 May 2016 14:59:44 -0700

·         Completed Sessions and Christie dailies

·         Went through Brinster’s edits and adjusted and added new bullets when necessary.

·         Redrafted a number of new bullets

·         Continued top hits doc research, moving onto AfAm issues/Voting rights.

Sessions wrote an op-ed demanding reduced LEGAL immigration numbers in the Washington Post, and the NY Times wrote a detailed rebuttal to it from a mostly moral/practical viewpoint. An analyst at the Cato Institute also wrote one, and it’s mostly from an economic/free markets perspective and it really takes Sessions to task on his numbers, which is really interesting.

Jeff Sessions: Low Immigration Between 1948 and 1973 Coincided With An Increase In The Median Wage Of “More Than 90 Percent From 1948 To 1973.” “During the first “great wave” of U.S. immigration took place from roughly 1880 to 1930. During this time, according to the Census Bureau, the foreign-born population doubled from about 6.7 million to 14.2 million people. Changes were then made to immigration law to reduce admissions, decreasing the foreign-born population until it fell to about 9.6 million by 1970. Meanwhile, during this low-immigration period, real median compensation for U.S. workers surged, increasing more than 90 percent from 1948 to 1973, according to the Economic Policy Institute. [Opinion, The Washington Post, 4/9/15<https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/slow-the-immigration-wave/2015/04/09/c6d8e3d4-dd52-11e4-a500-1c5bb1d8ff6a_story.html>]

·         Cato Institute’s Alex Nowrasteh: “Senator Sessions Only Presents The Income Data For Americans During The Time When Immigration Was Restricted.” “Senator Sessions only presents the income data for Americans during the time when immigration was restricted. Real per-capita GDP increased by 95 percent during the 1880–1930 period of high-immigration that he cites. There are other sources for wage data from that period, although all of them are troublesome compared to the modern economic information available.” [Cato Institiute, 4/10/15<http://www.cato.org/blog/rebuttal-sen-sessions-anti-legal-immigration-oped>]

·         Cato Institute’s Alex Nowrasteh: “Real Per-Capita GDP Increased By 95 Percent During The 1880–1930 Period Of High-Immigration That [Jeff Sessions] Cites.” “Senator Sessions only presents the income data for Americans during the time when immigration was restricted. Real per-capita GDP increased by 95 percent during the 1880–1930 period of high-immigration that he cites. There are other sources for wage data from that period, although all of them are troublesome compared to the modern economic information available.” [Cato Institiute, 4/10/15<http://www.cato.org/blog/rebuttal-sen-sessions-anti-legal-immigration-oped>]

Jeff Sessions: The Rise Of Immigration Into The United States “Coincides With A Period Of Middle-Class Contraction.” “In the 1960s, Congress lifted immigration caps and ushered in a “second great wave.” The foreign-born population more than quadrupled, to more than 40 million today. This ongoing wave coincides with a period of middle-class contraction. The Pew Research Center reports: “The share of adults who live in middle-income households has eroded over time, from 61% in 1970 to 51% in 2013.” Harvard economist George Borjas has estimated that high immigration from 1980 to 2000 reduced the wages of lower-skilled U.S. workers by 7.4 percent — a stunning drop — with particularly painful reductions for African American workers. Weekly earnings today are lower than they were in 1973.” [Opinion, The Washington Post, 4/9/15<https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/slow-the-immigration-wave/2015/04/09/c6d8e3d4-dd52-11e4-a500-1c5bb1d8ff6a_story.html>]

Jeff Sessions: “Harvard Economist George Borjas Has Estimated That High Immigration From 1980 To 2000 Reduced The Wages Of Lower-Skilled U.S. Workers By 7.4 Percent…Weekly Earnings Today Are Lower Than They Were In 1973.” “This ongoing wave coincides with a period of middle-class contraction. The Pew Research Center reports: ‘The share of adults who live in middle-income households has eroded over time, from 61% in 1970 to 51% in 2013.’ Harvard economist George Borjas has estimated that high immigration from 1980 to 2000 reduced the wages of lower-skilled U.S. workers by 7.4 percent — a stunning drop — with particularly painful reductions for African American workers. Weekly earnings today are lower than they were in 1973.” [Opinion, The Washington Post, 4/9/15<https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/slow-the-immigration-wave/2015/04/09/c6d8e3d4-dd52-11e4-a500-1c5bb1d8ff6a_story.html>]

  *   Cato Institute’s Alex Nowrasteh: “Concerning Borjas, His Findings That Immigrants Decrease The Wages Of Americans Are The Most Negative In The Economics Literature.” “Concerning Borjas, his findings that immigrants decrease the wages of Americans are the most negative in the economics literature. In that paper, he holds the supply of capital as fixed–an assumption that may be fine for an academic publication but it is not useful for analyzing policy.” [Cato Institiute, 4/10/15<http://www.cato.org/blog/rebuttal-sen-sessions-anti-legal-immigration-oped>]

  *   Cato Institute’s Alex Nowrasteh: “In That Paper, He Holds The Supply Of Capital As Fixed–An Assumption That May Be Fine For An Academic Publication But It Is Not Useful For Analyzing Policy.” “Concerning Borjas, his findings that immigrants decrease the wages of Americans are the most negative in the economics literature. In that paper, he holds the supply of capital as fixed–an assumption that may be fine for an academic publication but it is not useful for analyzing policy.” [Cato Institiute, 4/10/15<http://www.cato.org/blog/rebuttal-sen-sessions-anti-legal-immigration-oped>]

  *   Cato Institute’s Alex Nowrasteh: “Applying Borjas’ Research Methods To Different Periods Of Time Yields Less Negative Results.” “Applying Borjas’ research methods to different periods of time yields less negative results. This recent paper used Borjas’ methods but includes the wage data up through 2010, finding effects so small that they are insignificant. That is a significant rebuttal to Borjas’ findings.” [Cato Institiute, 4/10/15<http://www.cato.org/blog/rebuttal-sen-sessions-anti-legal-immigration-oped>]

·

  *   Cato Institute’s Alex Nowrasteh: “This Recent Paper Used Borjas’ Methods But Includes The Wage Data Up Through 2010, Finding Effects So Small That They Are Insignificant. That Is A Significant Rebuttal To Borjas’ Findings.” “Applying Borjas’ research methods to different periods of time yields less negative results. This recent paper used Borjas’ methods but includes the wage data up through 2010, finding effects so small that they are insignificant. That is a significant rebuttal to Borjas’ findings.” [Cato Institiute, 4/10/15<http://www.cato.org/blog/rebuttal-sen-sessions-anti-legal-immigration-oped>]

Jeff Sessions: “What We Need Now Is Immigration Moderation: Slowing The Pace Of New Arrivals So That Wages Can Rise, Welfare Rolls Can Shrink And The Forces Of Assimilation Can Knit Us All More Closely Together.” “It is not mainstream, but extreme, to continue surging immigration beyond any historical precedent and to do so at a time when almost 1 in 4 Americans age 25 to 54 does not have a job. What we need now is immigration moderation: slowing the pace of new arrivals so that wages can rise, welfare rolls can shrink and the forces of assimilation can knit us all more closely together.” [Opinion, The Washington Post, 4/9/15<https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/slow-the-immigration-wave/2015/04/09/c6d8e3d4-dd52-11e4-a500-1c5bb1d8ff6a_story.html>]

Jeff Sessions On The Effect Of More Immigrants In The United States: “Imagine The Pressure This Will Put On Wages, As Well As Schools, Hospitals And Many Other Community Resources.” “If no immigration curbs are enacted, the Census Bureau estimates that another 14 million immigrants will come to the United States between now and 2025. That means we will introduce a new population almost four times larger than that of Los Angeles in just 10 years time.The percentage of the country that is foreign-born is on track to rapidly eclipse any previous historical peak and to continue rising. Imagine the pressure this will put on wages, as well as schools, hospitals and many other community resources.” [Opinion, The Washington Post, 4/9/15<https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/slow-the-immigration-wave/2015/04/09/c6d8e3d4-dd52-11e4-a500-1c5bb1d8ff6a_story.html>]

Jeff Sessions: “Each Year, The United States Adds Another Million Mostly Low-Wage Permanent Legal Immigrants Who Can Work, Draw Benefits And Become Voting Citizens.” “Yet each year, the United States adds another million mostly low-wage permanent legal immigrants who can work, draw benefits and become voting citizens. Legal immigration is the primary source of low-wage immigration into the United States. In other words, as a matter of federal policy—which can be adjusted at any time—millions of low-wage foreign workers are legally made available to substitute for higher-paid Americans.” [Opinion, The Washington Post, 4/9/15<https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/slow-the-immigration-wave/2015/04/09/c6d8e3d4-dd52-11e4-a500-1c5bb1d8ff6a_story.html>]

  *   Cato Institute’s Alex Nowrasteh: “It Is Currently Illegal For New Immigrants To Get Most Means-Tested Welfare Benefits.” “As for the pressure on government services, those must be put in to perspective. It is currently illegal for new immigrants to get most means-tested welfare benefits. Those barriers to welfare use should be increased, as we’ve written about in detail at Cato. Even so, poor immigrants use much less means-tested welfare than poor-natives.” [Cato Institiute, 3/4/13<http://www.cato.org/publications/economic-development-bulletin/poor-immigrants-use-public-benefits-lower-rate-poor>]

  *   Cato Institute: “Poor Immigrants Use Public Benefits at a Lower Rate than Poor Native-Born Citizens” “Low-income immigrants use public benefits like Medicaid or the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, formerly the Food Stamp Program) at a lower rate than low-income native-born citizens.1 Many immigrants are ineligible for public benefits because of their immigration status. Nonetheless, some claim that immigrants use more public benefits than the native born, creating a serious and unfair burden for citizens.2 This analysis provides updated analysis of immigrant and native-born utilization of Medicaid, SNAP, cash assistance (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families and similar programs), and the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program based on the most recent data from the Census Bureau’s March 2012 Current Population Survey (CPS).” [Cato Institiute, 3/4/13<http://www.cato.org/publications/economic-development-bulletin/poor-immigrants-use-public-benefits-lower-rate-poor>]

Jeff Sessions: “High Immigration Rates Help The Financial Elite (And The Political Elite Who Receive Their Contributions) By Keeping Wages Down And Profits Up.” “But high immigration rates help the financial elite (and the political elite who receive their contributions) by keeping wages down and profits up. For them, what’s not to like? That is why they have tried to enforce silence in the face of public desire for immigration reductions. They have sought to intimidate good and decent Americans into avoiding honest discussion of how uncontrolled immigration impacts their lives.” [Opinion, The Washington Post, 4/9/15<https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/slow-the-immigration-wave/2015/04/09/c6d8e3d4-dd52-11e4-a500-1c5bb1d8ff6a_story.html>]

Jeff Sessions: “The Financial Elite (And The Political Elite Who Receive Their Contributions)…Have Tried To Enforce Silence In The Face Of Public Desire For Immigration Reductions.” “But high immigration rates help the financial elite (and the political elite who receive their contributions) by keeping wages down and profits up. For them, what’s not to like? That is why they have tried to enforce silence in the face of public desire for immigration reductions. They have sought to intimidate good and decent Americans into avoiding honest discussion of how uncontrolled immigration impacts their lives.” [Opinion, The Washington Post, 4/9/15<https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/slow-the-immigration-wave/2015/04/09/c6d8e3d4-dd52-11e4-a500-1c5bb1d8ff6a_story.html>]

·         Cato Institute’s Alex Nowrasteh: “Virtually Every Economist Who Studies Immigration Concludes That It Benefits Americans. Economist David Card Called Research On The Topic ‘The Elusive Search For Negative Wage Impacts Of Immigration.’” “I’m not alone in thinking that immigration is a boon for the U.S. economy. Virtually every economist who studies immigration concludes that it benefits Americans. Economist David Card called research on the topic ‘the elusive search for negative wage impacts of immigration.’ An honest discussion over immigration policy must also consider the universally acknowledged and known economic benefits of immigrants.” [Cato Institiute, 3/4/13<http://www.cato.org/publications/economic-development-bulletin/poor-immigrants-use-public-benefits-lower-rate-poor>]

Jeff Sessions: “The Percentage Of The Country That Is Foreign-Born Is On Track To Rapidly Eclipse Any Previous Historical Peak And To Continue Rising. Imagine The Pressure This Will Put On Wages, As Well As Schools, Hospitals And Many Other Community Resources.” “If no immigration curbs are enacted, the Census Bureau estimates that another 14 million immigrants will come to the United States between now and 2025. That means we will introduce a new population almost four times larger than that of Los Angeles in just 10 years time.The percentage of the country that is foreign-born is on track to rapidly eclipse any previous historical peak and to continue rising. Imagine the pressure this will put on wages, as well as schools, hospitals and many other community resources.” [Opinion, The Washington Post, 4/9/15<https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/slow-the-immigration-wave/2015/04/09/c6d8e3d4-dd52-11e4-a500-1c5bb1d8ff6a_story.html>]

·         Cato Institute’s Alex Nowrasteh: “As A Percentage Of The U.S.-Born Population, Yearly Immigrant Flows To The U.S. Are Half Of What They Were During The 19th Century And Early 20th Centuries.” [Cato Institiute, 3/4/13<http://www.cato.org/publications/economic-development-bulletin/poor-immigrants-use-public-benefits-lower-rate-poor>]

·         Cato Institute’s Alex Nowrasteh: “Australia’s Immigrants, As A Percent Of Their Entire Population, Is About Double What It Is In The United States.” [Cato Institiute, 3/4/13<http://www.cato.org/publications/economic-development-bulletin/poor-immigrants-use-public-benefits-lower-rate-poor>]

·         Cato Institute’s Alex Nowrasteh: “As A Percentage Of The U.S.-Born Population…Canada’s Immigrant Population Is About 50 Percent Bigger Than In The United States.” [Cato Institiute, 3/4/13<http://www.cato.org/publications/economic-development-bulletin/poor-immigrants-use-public-benefits-lower-rate-poor>]

·         Cato Institute’s Alex Nowrasteh: “Having More Immigrants Is Correlated With A More Quickly Growing Economy, Not Increasing Poverty And Joblessness.” [Cato Institiute, 3/4/13<http://www.cato.org/publications/economic-development-bulletin/poor-immigrants-use-public-benefits-lower-rate-poor>]

New York Times Editorial: Jeff Sessions’ Philosophy On Immigration Echoed “An Uglier Time In Our History, When Nativists Wielded The Spurious Argument That The More Immigrants Taken In By America, The Worse Off America Is.” “Even hard-liners on the same side of the issue as Mr. Sessions — like Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, Representative Lamar Smith of Texas and Representative Steve King of Iowa — take pains to cloak anti-immigration arguments with benign-sounding words of tolerant welcome. They say they support legal immigration. It’s illegal immigration they oppose. But here is Mr. Sessions, ditching the usual Republican talking points on immigration, choosing instead to echo an uglier time in our history, when nativists wielded the spurious argument that the more immigrants taken in by America, the worse off America is. He’s advocating for ‘slowing the pace’ of legal immigration, supposedly to increase job opportunities for native-born, low-skilled workers, particularly African-Americans.” [Editorial, New York Times, 4/15/15<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/15/opinion/senator-sessions-straight-up.html>]

New York Times Editorial: Jeff Sessions Offered “A Revival Of 1920s-Style Closed-Borders Populism.”“Mr. Sessions accuses the financial and political “elite” of a conspiracy to keep wages down through immigration. He seems to be betting that a revival of 1920s-style closed-borders populism will resonate, at a time when many Americans are fretting about income inequality and shriveled opportunity.” [Editorial, New York Times, 4/15/15<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/15/opinion/senator-sessions-straight-up.html>]

New York Times Editorial: “Mr. Sessions Ignores The Truth, Proved Over Centuries, That Immigration Over All Is Good For The American Economy.” “Politicians on the left — like Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts; Mayor Bill de Blasio of New York; and Zephyr Teachout, the Fordham law professor who ran a spirited campaign for New York governor — have persuasively argued that corporatist forces are making life difficult for the working woman and man. To excite Democratic voters in her presidential campaign, Hillary Rodham Clinton may have to adopt the same stance, or at least convincingly fake it. But nowhere in that argument is there a case for yanking America’s welcome mat. Mr. Sessions ignores the truth, proved over centuries, that immigration over all is good for the American economy.” [Editorial, New York Times, 4/15/15<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/15/opinion/senator-sessions-straight-up.html>]

New York Times Editorial: Jeff Sessions’ “Tears For Low-Income Americans Fail To Impress, Given His Party’s Obdurate Hostility To Policies That Help The Poor And Working Class.” “Mr. Sessions ignores the truth, proved over centuries, that immigration over all is good for the American economy. His tears for low-income Americans fail to impress, given his party’s obdurate hostility to policies that help the poor and working class. If he truly wanted to lift them up, he would be better off supporting labor unions and women’s rights, higher minimum wages, tougher wage-and-hour enforcement, more access to child-care and reproductive rights.” [Editorial, New York Times, 4/15/15<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/15/opinion/senator-sessions-straight-up.html>]

New York Times Editorial: “America’s Long Success As An Immigration Nation Is Hard To Argue Against. Unless You Never Wanted The Immigrants Here In The First Place, Which Mr. Sessions Now Seems Willing To Admit.” “Mr. Sessions ignores the truth, proved over centuries, that immigration over all is good for the American economy. His tears for low-income Americans fail to impress, given his party’s obdurate hostility to policies that help the poor and working class. If he truly wanted to lift them up, he would be better off supporting labor unions and women’s rights, higher minimum wages, tougher wage-and-hour enforcement, more access to child-care and reproductive rights. And immigration reform that unleashes the economic power of the nation’s shadow unauthorized population and welcomes the newcomers that our society and economy need. America’s long success as an immigration nation is hard to argue against. Unless you never wanted the immigrants here in the first place, which Mr. Sessions now seems willing to admit.” [Editorial, New York Times, 4/15/15<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/15/opinion/senator-sessions-straight-up.html>]

Cato Institute’s Alex Nowrasteh Published A Detailed Rebuttal Of Jeff Sessions’ Anti-Legal-Immigration Op-Ed, Refuting Sessions’ Claim That Legal Immigration Harms The U.S. Economy. “Senator Jeff Sessions’ (R-AL) Washington Post op-ed calls ‘for an honest discussion on immigration.’ He then lays out his case against legal immigration. Although I appreciate Sessions’ honesty in calling for large reductions in legal immigration–a level of candor too often shrouded by immigration-restrictionists’ political correctness (‘I’m only against illegal immigration’)–his op-ed makes a poor case for more government regulation of international labor markets.” [Cato Institiute, 4/10/15<http://www.cato.org/blog/rebuttal-sen-sessions-anti-legal-immigration-oped>]