I'm not saying that the proposition shouldn't have passed, just that she leaves out the reason why it's attacked now in her effort to present the a wholly positive picture with plenty of sarcasm for people who disagree with her.
I mentioned the "dynamic, changing system" to say that people need to be aware that measures like this serve as a rallying point for Democrats. It might still be necessary and important to pass the measure, but you can't assume that you're acting in a political vacuum without consequences.
“Ann’s looking at prop 187’s popularity twenty years ago and ignoring the fact that California’s now more Democrat than ever. I agree with her about the value of cutting off benefits to illegals, but she doesn’t give a complete picture of what’s going on.”
Ann has been pointing out the comparativly similar demo make up in the US today VS CA when prop 187 passed. Not that prop 187 would pass in CA today.
…”rallying point for Democrats”
It’s a flawed premise assuming all, or even a majority of dems are against restricting immigration and enforcing the law.