During his time in Congress, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz (D) co-sponsored the DREAM Act, which aimed to provide amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants.
A report by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) revealed that the bill would have had a significant financial impact on U.S. taxpayers, sparking debate about its long-term costs.
In 2017, while serving as a Democratic congressman, Walz joined other House Democrats and a handful of Republicans in supporting the DREAM Act of 2017. The legislation was designed to allow over three million illegal aliens to eventually obtain green cards and, later, full American citizenship.
At its core, the DREAM Act sought to provide a pathway to citizenship for those who arrived in the United States as minors, many of whom are commonly referred to as “Dreamers.”
However, the CBO’s analysis of the proposed legislation painted a less optimistic picture regarding the financial implications for American taxpayers.
According to the CBO report, the DREAM Act would have resulted in increased spending across various government programs, including Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. Specifically, the CBO estimated that between 2018 and 2027, the bill would increase direct spending by $26.8 billion, while only raising revenues by $900 million.
The budget deficit was projected to rise by $25.9 billion over that period due to changes in spending and revenue streams. On-budget deficits would have grown by $30.6 billion, while off-budget deficits would have decreased by $4.7 billion.
While the increase in Social Security taxes would have mitigated some costs, the overall impact on the federal budget was clear: the amnesty proposal would significantly boost spending without proportionally increasing revenue.
One of the most striking findings in the CBO’s report was how the DREAM Act would have impacted various taxpayer-funded programs.
For example, the bill was projected to increase higher education costs by $1 billion and drive up spending on earned income and child tax credits by $5.5 billion.
Medicaid spending was expected to rise by $5 billion, while food stamp expenditures would increase by $2.3 billion. Additional costs were projected for Supplemental Security Income (SSI), Social Security, and Medicare.
In addition to these immediate cost increases, the legislation also included provisions allowing newly legalized individuals to sponsor family members for green cards through a process known as “chain migration.” Chain migration, where legal permanent residents sponsor relatives to join them in the U.S., has long been a contentious issue in the immigration debate.
The CBO’s report noted that this process would have had far-reaching implications for the nation’s social safety net programs. Newly legalized residents and their family members would eventually become eligible for full Medicaid benefits, Social Security, and Medicare.
The report went on to state that as recipients of lawful permanent resident status began to naturalize, they could sponsor more relatives, further expanding the financial burden on social programs.
Over time, many of these individuals would pay enough into Social Security and Medicare to qualify for benefits, further increasing government spending.
Walz’s support for the DREAM Act was not an isolated instance of backing amnesty-related legislation. During his time in Congress, Walz also supported measures to grant green cards to migrants living in the United States under Temporary Protected Status (TPS), a program designed to give legal status to individuals from countries facing natural disasters or armed conflict.
Another amnesty proposal Walz supported aimed to entice illegal immigrants to serve in the U.S. military in exchange for legal permanent residency.
The DREAM Act, and other amnesty proposals like it, remain deeply divisive in the political sphere. Supporters argue that it provides a humane solution for undocumented individuals who have lived in the U.S. for years and deserve a chance to become citizens.
Critics, however, point to the CBO report and argue that such legislation imposes significant costs on taxpayers, adding strain to programs already under pressure.
As the debate over immigration reform continues, Walz’s role in supporting such proposals during his time in Congress continues to be a topic of discussion, particularly as he moves forward in his political career.
The CBO report’s findings serve as a reminder of the financial implications of amnesty legislation and the difficult balance between humanitarian concerns and fiscal responsibility.
