Meta-Blog

SEARCH QandO

Email:
Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock
MichaelW

BLOGROLL QandO

 
 
Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
 
 
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News
Politics
Business
Science
Technology
Health
Entertainment
Sports
Opinion/Editorial

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict

Blogging

Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links

Regional

Regional News

Publications

News Publications

 
Why the immigration bill failed
Posted by: McQ on Saturday, June 09, 2007

Rasmussen hits the nail on the very simple head:
The reality is much simpler and has nothing to do with legislative tactics. The immigration bill failed because a broad cross-section of the American people are opposed to it. Republicans, Democrats, and unaffiliated voters are opposed. Men are opposed. So are women. The young don’t like it; neither do the no-longer-young. White Americans are opposed. Americans of color are opposed.

The last Rasmussen Reports national telephone poll found that just 23% of Americans supported the legislation. When a bill has less popular support than the War in Iraq, it deserves to be defeated.
You'd think, especially given the "mandate" talk so popular now in Congress concerning Iraq.

They 'why' of its unpopularity is also fairly straight forward:
There is no mystery to why the public opposed the bill. In the minds of most Americans, immigration means reducing illegal immigration and enforcing the border. Only 16% believed the Senate bill would accomplish that goal.

It wasn’t amnesty or guest-worker programs or paths to citizenship that doomed the bill. Each of those provisions made it more difficult for some segments of the population to accept. However, most voters were willing to accept them as part of a true compromise that accomplished the primary goal of reducing illegal immigration.

The key to winning voter support was to accomplish that primary goal.
Until those goals are addressed and accomplished (no one is going to believe a bill which promises to accomplish them, they're going to have to be accomplished before the public will address the rest of the problem) guest workers, Z visas and all the other aspects of "comprehensive reform" will be rejected.

To put it succinctly:
The Senators missed that point and that’s where the mystery resides in analyzing why this bill failed. It’s not unusual for political leaders to be out of touch with their constituents, but rarely this out of touch. How could something this unpopular with voters get so close to passage in a legislative body that is supposed to represent them?
The question is, is anyone up there actually listening or are we about to repeat the cycle when the issues is again addressed? If they try to again ram through the same sort of bill, it truly will be "Bush's bill" and Republicans will pay for it dearly in '08.
 
TrackBacks
Return to Main Blog Page
 
 

Previous Comments to this Post 

Comments
Actually polls are mixed on the bill. There are also polls reporting 2 to 1 support for legalizing illegals over deporting them.

I believe that most Mexican illegals comport themselves rather well here. As a result, there is quite a bit of empathy for them out there, which, given the American instinct for fairness is perfectly expected. Sure, Americans want the border secure. God knows I do. But that doesn’t translate into support for sanctioning employers or deporting millions of gainfully employed workers. The republicans would do well to remember what happened to Pete Wilson.

yours/
peter
 
Written By: peter jackson
URL: http://www.liberalcapitalist.com
But that doesn’t translate into support for sanctioning employers or deporting millions of gainfully employed workers.
I don’t recall anywhere above where it was suggested millions should be deported. But I think you’re completely wrong about sanctioning employers who break the law and hire illegals.

One of the primary complaints about what is going on now is while they’re attempting to make new law, they’re not, nor have they ever been, enforcing existing law. People have a real problem with that and it is one of the primary reasons they don’t trust the government to do what they say they’ll do.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/blog
Yes, Peter, the polls are mixed. But that’s because there’s a big swath of people who, when they are polled, don’t have much of an opinion. When they are led through options, they are indeed much more likely to choose compassionate ones. That’s human nature. It doesn’t really say much about what their position would be if they were more informed.

The ones who are informed (i.e. are paying attention) are heavily against the bill. Those are the ones who would actually cast a vote based on the issue, because they care about it.

The poll McQ cited indicates that. Some more analysis of that factor is here in a Gallup poll.
 
Written By: Billy Hollis
URL: http://
The last Rasmussen Reports national telephone poll found that just 23% of Americans supported the legislation. When a bill has less popular support than the War in Iraq, it deserves to be defeated
It’s great that we’re told the public is against the bill NOW.

I heard precious little of that before.

I wonder why?

Probably for the same reason we hear very little about Congress ratings falling below that of the President....
 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
MQ!
One of the primary complaints about what is going on now is while they’re attempting to make new law, they’re not, nor have they ever been, enforcing existing law.
Perhaps, but it is an uninformed complaint:

On a typical day in fi scal year 2006, U.S.
Customs and Border Protection:
Processed—
•1.1 million passengers and pedestrians, including
•680,000 aliens
•70,900 truck, rail and sea containers
•240,737 incoming international air passengers
•71,151 passengers/crew arriving by ship
•327,042 incoming privately owned vehicles
•85,300 shipments of goods approved for entry
•$84,400,000 in fees, duties and tariffs

Executed—
•63 arrests at ports of entry
•2,984 apprehensions between ports for illegal
entry

Seized—
•1,769 pounds of narcotics in 63 seizures at ports
of entry
•3,788 pounds of narcotics in 20 seizures between
ports of entry
•$157,800 in undeclared or illicit currency and
•$646,900 worth of fraudulent commercial mer-
chandise at ports of entry
•4,462 prohibited meat, plant materials or animal
products, including 147 agricultural pests at ports
of entry

Refused entry of—
•574 non-citizens at our ports of entry
•63 criminal aliens attempting to enter the United
States

Intercepted—
•71 fraudulent documents
•20 smuggled aliens
•1.5 traveler for terrorism/national security
concerns

Rescued—
•8 illegal crossers in distress or dangerous condi-
tions between our ports of entry

Deployed—
•1,264 canine enforcement teams
•8,075 vehicles, 260 aircraft, 215 watercraft, and
•202 equestrian patrols

Protected more than—
•5,000 miles of border with Canada
•1,900 miles of border with Mexico
•95,000 miles of shoreline
•Employed approximately 42,000 employees—
•18,000 offi cers
•12,300 Border Patrol agents
•2,000 agriculture specialists
•650 air and marine officers

Managed—
•326 ports of entry
•20 sectors with 35 border checkpoints between the
ports of entry



Anyway you slice it, a $7 billion dollar budget and 1.1 million apprehensions a year can’t honestly be characterized as a trivial effort.

And regarding employer sanctions, there’s always the chance that folks would react negatively to the government sanctioning a bunch of small businesses into insolvency. That is, after all, whom most illegals work for.


Billy!
The ones who are informed (i.e. are paying attention) are heavily against the bill.
Either that or those opposed were simply the loudest and most indignant. I opposed the bill personally, probably due to the proposed employee verification system more than anything else.

yours/
peter.
 
Written By: peter jackson
URL: http://www.liberalcapitalist.com
Perhaps, but it is an uninformed complaint:
[snip list]
Anyway you slice it, a $7 billion dollar budget and 1.1 million apprehensions a year can’t honestly be characterized as a trivial effort.
Yeah, actually you can especially with 12 to 20 million illegals here now.

And then there’s the bill passed and signed into law last year authorizing 800 miles of fence of which 2 have been built. And the same bill which authorized thousands of new Border Patrol slots, of which 10% have been filled.

What did the new bill do? Cut down what was authorized previously and reauthorize more BP agents which hadn’t been filled previously. But everyone is supposed to believe they really mean it this time.

40% of illegals remaining here simply overstay their visas and we have no way to find them. And nothing is being done to find them or identify them. Agencies don’t talk to each other and thus known illegals who interact with them are allowed to wander off back into the shadows.

Like I said, border security first and then talk about the other stuff.
And regarding employer sanctions, there’s always the chance that folks would react negatively to the government sanctioning a bunch of small businesses into insolvency. That is, after all, whom most illegals work for.
It is pretty darn simple Peter .... don’t hire them and the rest takes care of itself.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/blog
"Anyway you slice it, a $7 billion dollar budget and 1.1 million apprehensions a year can’t honestly be characterized as a trivial effort."

Perhaps not, but it can honestly be characterized as an insufficient effort.
 
Written By: timactual
URL: http://
I’m late to this debate, but...Guys, Peter and Dubya, you have a FALSE dichotomy here. "We can’t deport 12 million illegals" (true) therefore; "We need to amnesty 12 million illegals" (False). It’s not deport ALL or deport NONE.

We CAN deport 500,000-1,000,000 over the next five years, reduce the inflow via fencing and Border Agents, AND begin to enforce current law on employers and employment, adding a decent Employer Verification System (One option, privitize the Verification System, the RFC is NOT for hardware and software to be operated by ICE, but the RFD is to operate the WHOLE system, at $40-75$ per check, just like rental databases or credit scores). We deport 500,000 and mayhap get 3-4 others to SELF-DEPORT, go home because life is too hard and risky in the US, then we don’t have to deal with 12 Million, but rather 8 Million to 10 Million. THEN we decide how to deal with those remaining.

Bottom-line: it’s not Amnesty or apartheid it’s deportation and enforcement then decide what to do with the survivors.
 
Written By: Joe
URL: http://
"We can’t deport 12 million illegals"

Maybe, maybe not. But, as the judge said as he handed out the sentence of two consecutive 99 year terms in prison, "I know you can’t do it all, just do as much as you can". Sometimes it is the effort to attain a goal that is important, not the actual attainment. "Ah, but a man’s reach should exceed his grasp, or what’s a heaven for?"
 
Written By: timactual
URL: http://
Hellozaw - this is just a testing, dont worry about it
 
Written By: Testerpmw
URL: http://testerxvy.com
I had enjoyed visiting your site, please check mine paragraph893
 
Written By: Testerzca
URL: http://testerjtq.com

 
Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
Name:
Email:
URL:
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Comment:
   
 
Vicious Capitalism

Divider

Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks

Divider

Divider