Posted on 05/05/2006 12:31:02 PM PDT by Johnson99
Voters Reject Guest-Worker Plan
A new Zogby poll of likely voters finds that Americans prefer, by two to one, the House of Representatives’ enforcement-only bill to the Senate’s plan to grant guest-worker status. Sixty-four percent of Americans support the House bill, with only 30 percent supporting the Senate plan. Support for the enforcement-only approach by itself also proves to be widespread, with 81 percent of Republicans, 72 percent of Independents, 57 percent of Democrats, and 53 percent of Hispanics supporting the enforcement-only House bill.
Regarding legal immigration, this poll demonstrates that Americans want less - not more - immigration, with only two percent responding that current immigration levels are too low. The Senate plan, which would increase legal immigration from one to two million a year, appears blatantly at odds with the wishes of voters. Americans, through and through, do not think we need more people, not even for low-paying jobs. Seventy-four percent of likely voters think that there are enough Americans to fill low-wage jobs, if employers would pay and treat employees better.
What do these numbers mean? Most Democrats, President Bush, and many Republicans in the Senate are out of touch. This news could be particularly damaging for Democrats, given that a majority of their constituents generally supports an enforcement-only approach. It could also be damaging for certain Republicans (like Senators McCain, Brownback, DeWine, or Graham) who currently attempt to auction off citizenship for (unlikely) future votes. Senate Republicans ignoring their base on immigration will likely benefit Democrats this November. Many Republicans are so angry over the guest-worker proposal that they may vote third-party or not vote at all.
This poll is the first poll to ask the question - using neutral language - whether likely voters prefer the House bill (enforcement-only) or Senate (guest-worker) plan. This outcome interestingly depicts that despite all the pro-amnesty rhetoric in the liberal media, 64 percent of Americans still favor an enforcement-only approach. If we were to have a more balanced media, with more opponents of immigration allowed to speak, this number would possibly jump from 64 to 80 percent.
Although previous polls showed that more Americans may support a guest-worker plan, the wording of such polls proved at best questionable, at worst blatantly biased. Critics, however, have always been skeptical of previous polls, especially when almost every person you know - Democrat or Republican - says he wants the same thing: (1) no guest-worker plan, (2) a border secured by guards and a physical fence, and (3) a massive reduction in legal and illegal immigration.
----------------- Matthew A. Roberts is a freelance columnist whose recent articles are mentioned or appear at Washington Times, FrontPageMag.org, National Federation of Republican Assemblies, National Ledger, Reality Check, MichNews, The Post Chronicle, Daley Times-Post, American Daily, Capital Hill Coffee House, et al. He also maintains a weblog at www.conservatoroccidentalis.com
reckon even zogby can't spin this...
Let's put it on the ol' ballot and see what happens.
Which is EXACTLY the reason why, like abortion, We The People won't be allowed to vote on the issue.
Looks like Bush, the GOP Senate and Of Course Democrats are all on the wrong side of this issue.
So when's the next demonstration scheduled?
They might be able to get those numbers even higher.
Si se puede.
Congress reacted with great speed to voter outrage over the Dubai port deal. Why are they so reticent now?
Welcome to FR and all.
That's just what this thread needed : more cowbell.
All one has to look at is the FR Poll on this issue.
Given this site is a Republician/Conservative web site,
the majority of of who voted will either vote 3rd party, or stay at home.
This should be a wake up call to the weak kneed GOP.
Of course this poll is bogus. (SAC)
Instead, the media is spinning the choreographed parades of illegal aliens through the streets of American cities as an indication of general support for amnesty.
It seems that we're going to have de facto amnesty, in the form of a guest-worker program, shoved down our throats by the Senate(after the election, of course). Bush will never sign an enforcement-only bill.
That's more like it. Prior to the current uproar over illegal immigration issue and the criminal alien protest marches, 2/3-3/4 of Americans wanted the borders secured and employer sanctions enforced before any temporary worker program was ever considered. With amnesty for illegals having always been out of the question for 80% of Americans. Now that America has witnessed the public displays of support for unlawful behavior by illegal immigrants, it appears polling numbers are returning to their earlier position. Even liberal pollsters like Zogby are getting the message. Now only if Bush, McCain and Kennedy would would get the message, we could see passage of a tough enforcement only bill, like HR4437.
"Bush will never sign an enforcement-only bill".
Everybody else except the bots seem to understand why Bush's numbers are so low. It's not the personality, it's his policies.
This is an "advocacy" poll, meaning that it reaches the conclusion that its sponsor wanted it to reach.
CIS is an adjunct to FAIR:
“Let’s be clear,” wrote Frank Sharry of the National Immigration Forum, “CIS was birthed by FAIR, the militant anti-immigration group. The CIS executive director moved from FAIR to CIS to head up the organization. Although now independent, the two organizations share the same basic agenda: an American version of what in Europe is called ‘zero immigration.’” According to Sharry, CIS masquerades as an objective, “squeaky clean” think tank, but CIS is “simply churning out high-sounding, low-credibility grist for the high-pitch, low-road anti-immigration forces in the United States.” This assessment of CIS is widely shared among pro-immigrant groups, but CIS studies are not only frequently cited by the “low-road” nativist forces but also by major news media. Source.
look, let's get one thing straight: there is, to my knowledge, absolutely nothing that disqualifies a democrat from holding public office. look at alcee hastings, for example (formerly a district court judge who WAS CAUGHT RED HANDED taking bribes to influence his rulings). in other words, the democrats in the elections are going to vote for the democrats NO MATTER who they are or what position they take on any issue. marion barry. etc. etc.
not so with the republicans. if they p*** off their base, as they have, they are gonna lose. they have about five months to do something about this problem, and the support of the people to do something, and if they don't, they are gonna go down in flames.
and they deserve to.
and happy words about flag burning amendments ain't gonna cut it this time.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.