Media figures misrepresented immigration polling to falsely claim that public opposes temporary worker program, path to citizenship
SUMMARY: Several media figures have misrepresented public opinion polling on immigration issues in order to falsely suggest that the public opposes providing a temporary work program and a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants. In fact, polling has consistently shown that most Americans favor some form of temporary guest worker program or path to citizenship for the illegal immigrants already in the United States.
With competing immigration bills passed by the House and pending in the Senate, several media figures have misrepresented public opinion polling in order to falsely suggest that the public opposes providing a temporary work program and a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants -- provisions that were included in the Senate proposal approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee on March 27 but excluded from the House bill that passed in December. In fact, polling has consistently shown that most Americans favor some form of temporary guest worker program or path to citizenship for the illegal immigrants already in the United States.
During the April 1 edition of Fox News Watch, Newsday columnist James P. Pinkerton claimed that "polls show 60, 70, 80 percent of the country supports the House approach," which would exclude the guest worker and citizenship provisions, and instead focus on enhancing border security and enacting tougher penalties for illegal immigrants and anyone who employs them or otherwise assists them in coming to and living in the United States. Similarly, CNN host Lou Dobbs claimed during the March 31 edition of Lou Dobbs Tonight that "most polls" show that a guest worker program is "opposed by the majority of Americans," while Weekly Standard executive editor Fred Barnes stated that evening on Fox News' Special Report with Brit Hume that "many more polls" indicate "opposition to earned citizenship, and against worker program" than in favor of those provisions.
In fact, with the exception of a March 16 NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll, all recent polls show majority support for a guest worker program or some kind of path to citizenship:
- An April 2 Associated Press/Ipsos poll found that 56 percent of respondents favored temporary worker status for illegal immigrants already living within the United States, while 41 percent opposed such a measure.
- A March 31 Time poll -- cited on Special Report by Fox News chief Washington correspondent Jim Angle shortly before Barnes's comments -- found 79 percent of respondents approve of a guest worker program, up 6 percent from the same poll two months earlier. Eighteen percent of respondents disapproved, down from 23 percent two months earlier.
- A March 30 poll released by the Pew Hispanic Center showed that 32 percent of Americans favor allowing illegal immigrants already in the United States to stay permanently, while another 32 percent favor a guest worker program for them. Only 27 percent said they should be required to leave the country, as the House bill would require, contradicting Pinkterton's assertion that a vast majority of Americans support it.
The only poll showing majority opposition to a guest worker program, the NBC/Wall Street Journal poll, indicated that 59 percent "strongly" or "somewhat" oppose a guest worker program, compared with 37 percent who "strongly" or "somewhat" support one.
Pinkerton's assertion came during a discussion with Fox News contributor and American University professor Jane Hall on Fox News Watch; Dobbs discussed the Senate bill with Time magazine senior writer and columnist Joe Klein and New York Daily News columnist Michael Goodwin.
From the April 1 edition of Fox News Watch:
PINKERTON: The polls show 60, 70, 80 percent of the country supports the House approach on this.
[crosstalk]
PINKERTON: It's pretty strong. The elites are one way on this issue --
HALL: No, but --
PINKERTON: -- the masses are another way.
HALL: No.
PINKERTON: That -- the media can't deal with that because the media are siding with the elites.
From the March 31 edition of Lou Dobbs Tonight:
GOODWIN: Well, I think the Democrats are clearly going to go for guest worker amnesty -- however you want to call it. So I think that it's going to be a lopsided vote if it ever comes up really, in the Senate. And in the House too, I think eventually, if there is a reconciliation, Democrats will be with the [Sen. John] McCain [R-AZ]-[Sen. Edward M.] Kennedy [D-MA] kind of bill. [McCain and Kennedy had introduced an earlier version of the Senate bill.]
KLEIN: McCain-Kennedy -- Bush, add to that.
GOODWIN: Yes.
DOBBS: Do you find it amazing, Joe, that here we are with borders that are demonstrably wide open, ports that are demonstrably insecure, that the president has decided to push forward with a guest worker program, which is, by most polls, at least opposed by the majority of Americans? Do you find it just remarkable?
KLEIN: No. Look, the Bush administration made a decision right after September 11th about how to fight the war on terror. They could either -- they could either protect the homeland, protect the ports, secure the borders, or they could fight the terrorists overseas.
From the March 31 edition of Fox News' Special Report with Brit Hume:
ANGLE: In fact, people were asked how to deal with illegal immigration, what they think is the best course of action: a guest worker plan, 79 percent in favor; whatever it takes to guard the border, 62 percent; deportation of illegal immigrants, 47 percent. Obviously, those numbers overlap a lot, so a lot of people who like a guest worker plan and also want to do whatever it takes to guard the border. And when asked about concerns about illegal immigration, 61 percent said because it costs too much to provide services for illegal immigrants; 44 percent said it increases the likelihood of terrorism, 43 percent talked about it driving down wages for Americans, who would compete at the lower end of the wage scale.
[...]
BARNES: The point, my point is there are many more polls that show just the opposite, opposition to earned citizenship, and against worker program. I like them both, but most people don't.
I'm fairly liberal is almost every issue, but I still think illegal immigration is just that...illegal. People who jump the line and cross the border illegally should NOT but rewarded with citizenship when there are plenty of people willing to follow the rules and wait in line.
And I fail to see how illegal immigrants, who come to the US to find work, are actually being punished when they are given jobs and told to work for so many years before becoming a citizen. How is that not rewarding and encouraging more illegal imigrants? They are getting what they want and we're supposed to believe it is a punishment or deterant.
THe problem that nobody want to admit, is that the best way to stop illegal imigration is to punish those companies hiring them in the first place. But since many of these companies are wealthy and highly influential with POlitical ties...that will enver happen. And without the government enforcing the LAW then the law against illegal immigration may as well not exist.
I know you guys are really going against Lou Dobbs, and on many issues I've wanted to reach into my TV and choke him myself (defending Judy Miller for one). BUt I agree with him on this immmigration issue and think you are stretching for reasons to bash him. Illegal immigration threatens the US economy, drives down wages, hurts the middle class, and hurt many who are unable to find a job that will pay a legal wage.
The Illegal Immigration issue will never be solved because there will never be any REAL Prosecution of Employers who hire them. Without this, any attempted solution is just another Political Smokescreen.
"THe problem that nobody want to admit, is that the best way to stop illegal imigration is to punish those companies hiring them in the first place. "
I completely agree with that statement; but I saw Lou's immigration special I think it too much of it was dedicated to bashing Mexicans.
Immigration is a part of our ECONOMY and has been for 100 years!
Where were the anti-immigration notions 10 years ago? Five? Last year?
Why are people "suddenly" up and arms about immigration? Why now? Is it because most people simply do not know the history of their own country, and have only recently been hearing about immigration--from ANTI-IMMIGRATION voices--in the news for the last several month? And therefore are simply reacting to the new that immigration is a problem?
Well, since the Industrial Revolution, immigrants--migrant workers--have been a part of our economy. There are market/farming/industrial forces that create a demand for and a support system for immigrants to work in this--and most other countries. And this has been in place for A VERY LONG TIME.
It is not just now--in the 21st Century--that immigration started. Immigration is--has been--part of our culture.
To harp all over the word "illegal" is just place ignorant. It shows that most people in this country are sheep and are just following blindly along by the gasbags in the Congress and on TV who are stirring up the public with typical fear mongering.
I know, let's get another billion more people on this planet to hate America as we start of the 21st Century by rounding up and jailing 10 million people!
Misinformation is what this is about. Misinformation of history as well as what is reported in "the news". This poll about guest workers is just yet another example.
First, "legal" is not so important as people think. We can pass a law this week to change that. Laws change all the time--what was illegal yesterday is legal today and vice versa. That's how our legal system works. In fact, debates are happening as we speak as to how to amend our laws.
As I've said, nobody cared about immigration as long as it was not talked about.
Immigration numbers have not been increasing--the dynamics of the border, like where they cross, is what have been changing; so in some geographical places it looks like immigration is increasing as crossings get concentrated. A fence will simply exacerbate this.
Sixty percent of the 10-12 millions immigrants are "overstays"--those who get here on temporary visas and stay. Which means that it is NOT 10-12 million people "came here illegally."
Okay, so there ARE 10-12 million people here without a legal status--i.e. "undocumented." Well, there always has been that percentage of people with such a status in this country. Think about that. Why do we want to round them up NOW?
Think of the logistics of rounding people up. The man power, the money, the time and the resorces we will ahve to spend to round people up. Will doing so take people and resources away from normal law enforcement? Of course.
Then think of the moral implications of rounding people up. While Conservatives will think, "We are just enforcing the law," all across this country doors are going to be kicked in, people arrested, families broken up, businesses effected, etc., etc. Hatred and derision will rise. (This is what is happening in Iraq!)
We have been living with immigration and immigrants for a very long time. We should continue to. We need a guest worker program. And I think that many people will agree.
That on this issue the Republicans look to the "reviled" country of France for guidelines on how to build an immigration policy. France. The country with the riots and burning cars instigated by creating 2nd class citizens of the same caliber the myopic dolts in the Republican Party can't wait to create and subsequently exploit.
Remember: all the old Dixiecrats switch parties when the Democrats backed the Civil Rights movement with legislation. I think they really miss slavery. It was so much more profitable than paying people a living wage, which they have taken giant steps to diminish.
The only way to combat the problem is to punish businesses which hire undocumented immigrants. Drop the illegal tag. We're ALL illegal immigrants whose ancestors stole stolen Indian property. By our own legal standards, every scrap of land belongs to them, since you cannot hold good title once a "conversion" (theft) has taken place. Time doesn't matter. Ignorance doesn't matter. It's still stolen. So everyone get off the moral high ground. It doesn't belong to you anyways.
The conventional wisdom on the left is that we should go after the businesses that hire the "undocumented workers" (I dare not call the illegals around here) and fine them. My assumption is that this would dissuade the companies from hiring undocumenteds in the first place.
Let's say we do that. From tomorrow on, any company found to have "undocumented workers" will be fined $1 million per worker. Poof, thousands (hundreds of thousands? millions?) of people out of work at the snap of a finger. Are they just going to leave? I don't think they can file for unemployment. You mentioned yourself about the moral implications of just "rounding them up". What about the moral implications of taking their (undocumented) income?
I don't have the answer, but this "going after businesses" concept escapes me. What does that do exactly?
A bunch would probably go back to Mexico. There would be no jobs for them here. It's simple economics.
The reason you go after business is because they are the exploiters. They are the ones that are getting the benefits of illegal immigration. They get enormously cheap labor while being able to skirt all kinds of employment regulations. It's equivelent of going after the gloriously late Pablo Escobar rather than the peasant farmers that grow cocoa.
Yes, there is a lot of simple economics out there. Simple to ship jobs overseas because it's cheaper. Simple to cut workers pensions, health care, vacation, all kinds of things. Business always finds a way, Scott. And it's generally a way none of us prefer.
My point being that punishing BIG BUSINESS will cause BIG BUSINESS to react, maybe do something that you like less than their exploitation of the undocumented worker.
It's not simple.
It is simple. And your apologetic attitude towards exploitation is appalling. Talk about spin.
Campers who leave their food out at their campsite attract bears. You blame the campers, not the bears. If the campers lock up their food, the bears stay in the woods where they belong.
- to falsely suggest that the public opposes providing a temporary work program and a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants.... polling has consistently shown that most Americans favor some form of temporary guest worker program or path to citizenship - mmfa
mmfa is as guilty as all the other partisans who are promoting an agenda on this issue...note their use of "and" "or" in their statement. It is typical of mmfa.
However, having said that, mmfa provides a wealth of info on this subject. If you wonder what polls say...follow the links and read them for yourself. You will find the results all over the map. Some say... illegals are a drain on our economy...they should be allowed to stay...they should be granted citizenship...they should be deported...and on and on and on.
Most polls are designed to promote a pre-conceived agenda and then trumpeted in sound bites or headlines. If you're inclined to follow and/or be persuaded by polls...read away...you can find any amount of polling results to support your position.
If you're more inclined to base your opinion on what you believe is best for America...convey those opinions to your elected officials and hold them accountable.
It would be my opinion that illegal immigrants should be found...made to pay a stiff fine...register/report to authorities...be eligible for temporaty work permits...should not be eligible for citizenship. I would also opine that more new laws are not the answer...after all...congress passed laws in the 80's and the 90's that were supposed to fix the problem of illegal imigration...and they have been entirely impotent...the illegal immigrant population has increased from around 3 million to about 12 million.
Lastly, the first way to cure the problem...secure the borders against illegal immigrants.
close tags