Interesting, but their graph leaves a lot of questions unanswered. For starters, it doesn't seem to differentiate between legal and illegal immigration. Beyond that, it simply looks at the rate of "insured vs uninsured", whereas a more useful metric would be comparing the average costs that each imposes upon the system.
Given that these are pretty obvious methodological improvements, it makes me suspicious that someone at EPI was cherry-picking stats.
You know how conservatives like to blame uninsured illegal immigrants for the rising costs of health care? Well, the Economic Policy Institute released this graph that shows change in the share of the uninsured with and without post-2000 immigration increases.* Don't you love it when you can point to a graph to prove your point?
* This post originally said this was a change in overall health care spending.
Please remember that Campus Progress' terms of use do not allow promoting or endorsing any particular political party or candidate for office. Posts or comments that do this will be deleted.
Given that these are pretty obvious methodological improvements, it makes me suspicious that someone at EPI was cherry-picking stats.