2007 May 23 Wednesday
More Democrats Than Republicans Oppose Senate Illegal Amnesty

The masses are not keen on what our rulers want to do to us on immigration.

A Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey conducted Monday and Tuesday night shows that just 26% of American voters favor passage of the legislation. Forty-eight percent (48%) are opposed while 26% are not sure. The bi-partisan agreement among influential Senators and the White House has been met with bi-partisan opposition among the public. The measure is opposed by 47% of Republicans, 51% of Democrats, and 46% of those not affiliated with either major party.

The gap between elected Democrats and the Democratic Party masses highlights a gap between their respective interests. The elected Democrats want more poor people who will reliably vote for Democrats. The poor Democrats want less competition in the labor market and less crime in their neighborhoods and they understand that masses of Hispanic immigrants drive down their wages and raise crime rates and worsen the public schools their kids attend.

The masses want what the elites oppose: greater enforcement of immigration laws.

The enforcement side of the debate is clearly where the public passion lies on the issue. Seventy-two percent (72%) of voters say it is Very Important for “the government to improve its enforcement of the borders and reduce illegal immigration.” That view is held by 89% of Republicans, 65% of Democrats, and 63% of unaffiliated voters.

We may yet win this thing.

Make your views known to your elected officials, preferably with phone calls. Here is the US House of Representatives contact list.. Also, check out this combined directory and Senate and House contact numbers that includes both district office numbers and Washington DC office numbers. You can also call the U.S. Senate switchboard: 202-224-3121. Plus, you can call the U.S. House switchboard: 202-225-3121.

Share |      By Randall Parker at 2007 May 23 11:19 PM  Immigration Elites Versus Masses


Comments
Lyle said at May 24, 2007 2:06 PM:

As a democrat, I oppose the legislation because I believe it will bankrupt our country's social programs. As they're already in serious trouble, I don't think we need any help.

If we're going to import citizens, we should be importing a net positive in terms of taxpayer dollars compared to services used. I have no problem with allowing immigration of refugees or low income workers as long as for every imported charity case, our system also imports the taxpayers that can cover the services for both.

There are many other issues with keeping our social programs going, ... we don't need to add an even greater immigration imbalance as well.

Dragon Horse said at May 24, 2007 4:28 PM:

Randell:

France is following Steve Sailer. :-)

http://www.news24.com/News24/World/News/0,,2-10-1462_2118014,00.html

They are going to pay immigrants to leave! :-O

CorkyAgain said at May 25, 2007 11:30 AM:

The point of "bipartisanship", with this bill as with others, is that neither party is stuck with the blame. The political calculation is that voters have nowhere else to go besides the two major parties. So we go on voting for them, despite these abominations.

Mensarefugee said at May 25, 2007 4:24 PM:

Im confuzzled about the France thingy. Are they giving incentives for some illegal immigrants to leave? Or for the legal ones who came here decades ago? Arent those legal ones citizens?

Dave said at May 26, 2007 2:52 AM:

Well there was a poll in France a while ago after the 'veil' headscarf controversy asking how much recent immigrants considered themselves French and the responses caused some concern.

In Britain, Blair has recently given a lot of people citizenship just to get them off the asylum seeker statistics because people complain that we are a soft touch.. Many of them probably don't even consider themselves British, immigration isn't what it used to be, they come for the welfare not for the love of the nation.

I don't see how this French policy can work because in Europe now we have 'freedom of movement' rules so any 'EU' citizen can go anywhere and recently Spain has been giving large scale amnesty to Africans which has just encouraged more illegals ofcourse. So the French could pay immigrants to leave who then turn up in Spain and from there with EU citizenship back to France.. huh... I guess they will try to stop that happening but the EU likes to cause trouble so I can't see it being simple.

Mensarefugee said at May 26, 2007 4:35 AM:

Clearly the Sarkozy govt is handling the issue gingerly because if they do not, the socialists could be back in power next election. But if people like Sarkozy were elected twice or thrice in a row - I suspect you would see more dramatic and straightforward policies on non-assimilating/illegal/etc minorities and/or outsiders.

Randall Parker said at May 27, 2007 12:10 PM:

Lyle,

I agree with you on the effects of immigrants on social programs. We can't even afford all the entitlements granted to old folks and when the Baby Boomers start retiring the financial strains that will cause will lead to large cut-backs in other social programs plus much higher taxes. Why make the problem even worse with massive importation of low skilled, low paid, low tax-paying immigrants?

Matthew M. Contreras said at February 12, 2015 2:02 AM:

Democrats and Republicans both are same, just 2 different sides of a coin!


Post a comment
Comments:
Name (not anon or anonymous):
Email Address:
URL:
Remember info?

      
 
Web parapundit.com
Go Read More Posts On ParaPundit
Site Traffic Info
The contents of this site are copyright ©