What Seifert neglected to say

06/10/2005

Reprinted from the Marshall Independent


To The Editor:

Rep. Seifert’s clear disdain for using tax dollars to help those less-fortunate is disheartening. It obviously disturbs him immensely to have to share his tax dollar with those less-fortunate. He seems to have a particularly unwelcoming manner when it comes to new immigrants.

In his rush to judgment, Rep. Seifert has a tendency to overlook a number of important facts. I wanted to share a few of them.

First, we should keep in mind that many of the immigrants are legal immigrants. They have as much right to be here, work here and live here as you and I. As legal citizens of the United States and legal residents of Minnesota, I would remind Rep. Seifert that he was elected to represent all citizens of his district, regardless of whether or not they voted for him and regardless of their ethnic, social or economic status.

Rep. Seifert stated in his recent letter to the editor that thousands and thousands of people are flocking to Minnesota for the “welfare” benefits.

According to the Minnesota Department of Human Services, the majority of Medical Assistance expenditures “more than 78 percent” are spent on people who are elderly, or have a disability.

Are the elderly and disabled flocking to our state by the thousands for our welfare benefits?

According to a report by the Urban Institute, “contrary to the public’s perception, when all levels of government are considered together, immigrants generate significantly more in taxes than they cost in services received.” There are a number of similar reports that have concluded exactly the same thing.

In fact, at a conference held in Marshall in the fall of 2004 that focused on economic development and immigration, the Minnesota Commissioner of Economic Development also indicated very clearly in his keynote presentation that the economic impact of new immigrants has a net-positive impact on our economy. This is, that the economic benefits they provide outweigh any costs in services they require overall. He also noted a number of other benefits that new immigrants bring particularly to rural areas, who are otherwise experiencing significant declines in population.

Consider state Sen. Becky Lourey’s recent proposal, which would require large corporations like Wal-Mart to report how many of their employees use state-funded health care programs. In other states that have compiled such lists, Wal-Mart is at or near the top among employers with workers enrolled in state medical assistance. Perhaps these are the folks that are, as Rep. Seifert states, flocking to Minnesota by the thousands and thousands. It takes a lot of workers to staff just one new Wal-Mart Superstore.

Does this suggest that in fact, our tax dollars are subsidizing extremely profitable corporations by providing state-funded health care coverage to their employees so they don’t have to? It’s worth thinking about.

I’m disappointed in Rep. Seifert for his narrow views on people who depend on state-funded services. I, for one, am proud of living in a state that cares about people, especially the elderly and the disabled. I am also proud to live in a state that others want to come to. I think Rep. Seifert’s suggestion that they are coming here solely for the “welfare” benefits, sells Minnesota very short. I can think of many good reasons why people might want to live in our state. It’s a great place to live.

Donata DeBruyckere
Marshall