Poll data on illegal immigration

[Smash255]

This comes from the VERY SAME POLL Carl is referring to, something he decided to "leave out"

Question 7

Giving immigrants already in the U.S illegally a path to become U.S citizens if they pay back taxes. pay a fine, learn English and do not have a criminal record

           
                                  ALL            REP          DEM       IND 
Strong Support          42%           41%          44%      42%
Somewhat Support    26%           28%          28%     22%
Somewhat Oppose      7%              6%           6%        7%
Strong Oppose           20%           22%           17%      21%
DK                                 5%             3%             5%       7%

[Smash255]

Carl,  The Bottom line is most Americans believe that those already here illegally should be able to become citizens if they meet certain requirments.  Their is no spin, lie or any other crap that you spout that can change the fact most Americans support making those immigrants who are already here illgeally to become citizens.  Those are the facts period.

[Smash255]

Carl,  The Bottom line is most Americans believe that those already here illegally should be able to become citizens if they meet certain requirments.  Their is no spin, lie or any other crap that you spout that can change the fact most Americans support making those immigrants who are already here illgeally to become citizens.  Those are the facts period.

So, should an illegtal alien who has been here for say ten years and hasn't paid income taxes be able to get away with paying three years of back taxes while a native born American who has not paid such taxes for the same period have to pay for all ten years?

Sorry, but when the public hears the specifics of the proposed legislation, as opposed to glitteringt (and false) generalities, it opposes amnesty.

This is already known.  the bottom line is the public favors citizenship period. 

[Smash255]

Carl,  The Bottom line is most Americans believe that those already here illegally should be able to become citizens if they meet certain requirments.  Their is no spin, lie or any other crap that you spout that can change the fact most Americans support making those immigrants who are already here illgeally to become citizens.  Those are the facts period.

So, should an illegtal alien who has been here for say ten years and hasn't paid income taxes be able to get away with paying three years of back taxes while a native born American who has not paid such taxes for the same period have to pay for all ten years?

Sorry, but when the public hears the specifics of the proposed legislation, as opposed to glitteringt (and false) generalities, it opposes amnesty.

This is already known.  the bottom line is the public favors citizenship period. 

Er, among the vast majority of voters this is NOT known.

Note, I cited the subquestion of the survey of approval of amnesty when the illegtals only had to pay three years back taxes.

Also, I noticed you evaded my question with regtards to equity .

All Amnesty is, is a buzz word.  Amnesty would actually be nothing at all, no back taxes, not 3 years, it would be no fines, no checks, no nothing.  Thats would amnesty is.  Bottom line is no matter how you twist your way out of it, this is what the American people want Citizenship for those already here.  period.  Thats what the public favors, thats what the poll suggests period.  Just because the poll results show that the American public differs from you on the question of citizenship doesn't make something wronf with the poll.  All it means is THE AMERICAN PUBLIC DISAGREES WITH YOU.. 

[Smash255]

Carl,  The Bottom line is most Americans believe that those already here illegally should be able to become citizens if they meet certain requirments.  Their is no spin, lie or any other crap that you spout that can change the fact most Americans support making those immigrants who are already here illgeally to become citizens.  Those are the facts period.

So, should an illegtal alien who has been here for say ten years and hasn't paid income taxes be able to get away with paying three years of back taxes while a native born American who has not paid such taxes for the same period have to pay for all ten years?

Sorry, but when the public hears the specifics of the proposed legislation, as opposed to glitteringt (and false) generalities, it opposes amnesty.

This is already known.  the bottom line is the public favors citizenship period. 

Er, among the vast majority of voters this is NOT known.

Note, I cited the subquestion of the survey of approval of amnesty when the illegtals only had to pay three years back taxes.

Also, I noticed you evaded my question with regtards to equity .

All Amnesty is, is a buzz word.  Amnesty would actually be nothing at all, no back taxes, not 3 years, it would be no fines, no checks, no nothing.  Thats would amnesty is.  Bottom line is no matter how you twist your way out of it, this is what the American people want Citizenship for those already here.  period.  Thats what the public favors, thats what the poll suggests period.  Just because the poll results show that the American public differs from you on the question of citizenship doesn't make something wronf with the poll.  All it means is THE AMERICAN PUBLIC DISAGREES WITH YOU.. 

Well, you're wrongt once again.

Lets look at the details.

When most people hear that the illegals to be granted amnesty would have to "learn English" most people erroneously assume that means learn sufficent English to be able to pass the citizenship exams.  That is NOT the case, as the bill specifies that they merely need to know "minimnal English."

When most people hear that the illegals to be granted amnesty would have to pay back taxes, most people errnoeously assume that means all back taxes, whereas in factg the bill specifies only three years of back taxes.

When most people hear that the illegals to be granted amnesty would have no criminal record, most would assume that would mean that they have not been arrested for crimes.  However, many have been arrested but the feds have compelled local agencies to release them without prosecution.  Indeed, I cited a couple of weeks ago an example in San Diego of how the prosecutors were refusing to prosecute smugglers arrested by the Border Patrol (so the only reason they don't have a criminal record is because pro-illegal prosecutors refused to obey they law themselves).

Most people actually do realize that must learn English doesn't exactly mean being proficent, most people know that its three years back taxes, not the whole thing.  These are things that have already been discussed and are already known.


The bottom line is the American public support citizenship for those already here.  No spin you have  can change that fact.  It jhas nothing to do with the wording of the poll, any cohersion or any of the other crap you want to pull out of thin air simply because the polls show the pubblic disagrees with you.  This is what the American public wants, border security AND Citizenship.  Period, they want BOTH and EVERY SINGLE POLL BACKS THAT UP.

[Smash255]

Carl,  The Bottom line is most Americans believe that those already here illegally should be able to become citizens if they meet certain requirments.  Their is no spin, lie or any other crap that you spout that can change the fact most Americans support making those immigrants who are already here illgeally to become citizens.  Those are the facts period.

So, should an illegtal alien who has been here for say ten years and hasn't paid income taxes be able to get away with paying three years of back taxes while a native born American who has not paid such taxes for the same period have to pay for all ten years?

Sorry, but when the public hears the specifics of the proposed legislation, as opposed to glitteringt (and false) generalities, it opposes amnesty.

This is already known.  the bottom line is the public favors citizenship period. 

Er, among the vast majority of voters this is NOT known.

Note, I cited the subquestion of the survey of approval of amnesty when the illegtals only had to pay three years back taxes.

Also, I noticed you evaded my question with regtards to equity .

All Amnesty is, is a buzz word.  Amnesty would actually be nothing at all, no back taxes, not 3 years, it would be no fines, no checks, no nothing.  Thats would amnesty is.  Bottom line is no matter how you twist your way out of it, this is what the American people want Citizenship for those already here.  period.  Thats what the public favors, thats what the poll suggests period.  Just because the poll results show that the American public differs from you on the question of citizenship doesn't make something wronf with the poll.  All it means is THE AMERICAN PUBLIC DISAGREES WITH YOU.. 

Well, you're wrongt once again.

Lets look at the details.

When most people hear that the illegals to be granted amnesty would have to "learn English" most people erroneously assume that means learn sufficent English to be able to pass the citizenship exams.  That is NOT the case, as the bill specifies that they merely need to know "minimnal English."

When most people hear that the illegals to be granted amnesty would have to pay back taxes, most people errnoeously assume that means all back taxes, whereas in factg the bill specifies only three years of back taxes.

When most people hear that the illegals to be granted amnesty would have no criminal record, most would assume that would mean that they have not been arrested for crimes.  However, many have been arrested but the feds have compelled local agencies to release them without prosecution.  Indeed, I cited a couple of weeks ago an example in San Diego of how the prosecutors were refusing to prosecute smugglers arrested by the Border Patrol (so the only reason they don't have a criminal record is because pro-illegal prosecutors refused to obey they law themselves).

Most people actually do realize that must learn English doesn't exactly mean being proficent, most people know that its three years back taxes, not the whole thing.  These are things that have already been discussed and are already known.


The bottom line is the American public support citizenship for those already here.  No spin you have  can change that fact.  It jhas nothing to do with the wording of the poll, any cohersion or any of the other crap you want to pull out of thin air simply because the polls show the pubblic disagrees with you.  This is what the American public wants, border security AND Citizenship.  Period, they want BOTH and EVERY SINGLE POLL BACKS THAT UP.

You make assertions without facts.

The polls you cite state that we'll give you border enforcement and employer emforcement if you accept amenesty.

Let amnesty stand on its own (it falls).

Existing laws against illegal border entry and illegal employment should be enforced now (they are popular).

For starters if we should have increased border security or not, is not what I am arguing here.  Most Americans myself included feel we do need border security.  However, most ALSO favor citizenship, as ALL the polls indicate.  Most believe the issue is not do we do one or the other, most believe we SHOULD DO BOTH

From the poll

12. Which of the following three types of legislation would you prefer:
a. A bill that concentrates on border security and employer verification of workers' legal status, but does not
include a temporary-worker program or a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants who are already here,
because we have to secure the border and improve employer verification first before we can think about
other solutions.
b. A bill that includes border security and employer verification of workers' legal status, but also includes a
temporary-worker program, because we have to address the need for workers by U.S. employers if we are
ever going to get control of the border.
c. A bill that includes border security, employer verification of workers' legal status, and a temporary-worker
program, but also includes a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants who are already here, because any
solution to the immigration problem must deal with the illegal immigrants who are already in America.
                                                                            ALL REP IND DEM
JUST BORDER SECURITY/VERIFICATION..............22% 26% 19% 21%
INCLUDE TEMPORARY WORKER ..........................25% 26% 26% 22%
INCLUDE PATH TO CITIZENSHIP ...........................40% 35% 41% 43%
DON'T KNOW/NO OPINION.....................................14% 13% 13% 14%



most also favor having Border Secuirty and Temporary worker, or bordeer Security  and path to citizenship over no bill at all, and its across the board fro GOP, Dems & independents

13. If the choice facing Congress is between a bill that includes border security, employer enforcement, and a
temporary-worker program, or no bill at all, which would you prefer?
                                                                           ALL REP IND DEM
BORDER/EMPLOYER/TEMPORARY WORKER........71% 76% 71% 66%
NO BILL AT ALL....................................................22% 18% 21% 27%
DON'T KNOW/NO OPINION...................................... 7% 6% 8% 6%
14. If the choice facing Congress is between a bill that includes border security, employer enforcement, a
temporary-worker program, and a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants who are already here, or no bill at all,
which would you prefer?
                                                                              ALL REP IND DEM
BORDER/EMPLOYER/WORKER/CITIZENSHIP.........61% 59% 61% 63%
NO BILL AT ALL....................................................30% 33% 29% 30%
DON'T KNOW/NO OPINION...................................... 9% 8% 10% 8%


And how no bill could effect who someone will vote for
15. As you probably know, Republicans control both the House of Representatives and the Senate. If the House
and Senate disagree so strongly about the correct approach to illegal immigration so that no bill passes, will that
make you more likely or less likely to vote for Republican candidates for the House and Senate in the election this
November?
                                                                             ALL REP IND DEM
MORE LIKELY .......................................................19% 33% 15% 9%
LESS LIKELY.........................................................40% 20% 42% 58%
NO EFFECT (VOLUNTEERED).................................27% 35% 24% 24%
DON'T KNOW/NO OPINION.....................................14% 12% 20% 9%

[Smash255]

Smash

You keep misreading the polls.

You love the polls which condition border enforcement upon accepting amnesty.  The border enforcement is very popular, and many people will reluctantly approve of it upon being made promises which will NOT be kept.

However, if given the choice between a bill with border and employer enforcement (with guest worker) they prefer that to a bill with amnesty.

Let amnesty stand on its own, and it fails!

Wrong.

Their are more people that would rather no bill at all if it included citizenship than those who would rather no bill at all if it was guest worker.  HOWEVER, if given the choice between guest worker and path to citizenship, the path to citizenship wins out.  Likewise if all 3 choices are given, only border security, border security with temporary worker, and border seurity with path to citizenship.  The border security with path to citizenship wins out, followed by border security with temporary worker and last border securty alone. 

Most Americans believe we should do more to secure the border, but they do NOT want border security to be the only part of the bill and want the bill to contain BOTH border seecuirty and a path to citizenship.

[Smash255]

If you bothered to read the poll you posted you would see that more people favor border security, employer sanctions and guest workers than they do when amnesty is included.

Now, so far no only has let amnesty stand on its own, but we may soon get a poll on that.

Remember, despite promises, in 1986 we got amnesty with no real border enforcement and no real employer sanctions.

The situation could acurately be likened to telling a bunch of kids they can have have cake and ice cream only if they eat raw liver first.  No doubt you would saw that those who did eat the raw liver did so because they really like it, rather than because they were given no other option.

Since the advocates of amnesty got their way in 1986, it seems only fair to me that this time we get real border enforcement and real employer sanctions, and then we'll deliver on amnesty in the same way border enforcement and employers sanctions was delivered after 1986.

Again you are wrong.

Most people want both border security AND path to cititzenship than any other option.  More people want that option over just border security, and more people want border security + path to citizenship over just border security.

Where the temp worker gets more support is when the no bill at all option is mentioned.  In other words the % of those who would want no bill passed is higher with the citiznesip than the guest worker program.  However when given the choice between citizenship, guest worker, or simply border security, more support a path to citizenship than any other option. 

In other words the only reason why the guest worker program has a higher # when the no bill option is mentioned is that their are some who would favor a guest worker program, but would not favor a path to citizenship, those who favor a path to citizenship would also accept a guest worker porgram, however if given a choice between the path for citizenship and the temp worker program most favor the path for citizenship.

 

[Smash255]

Would also like to add, that the citizenship poll in the Ayers/ McHenry poll, (the first question on citizenship, question # 7) mentions NOTHING about Border security, yet Americans stilL OVERWELMINGLY support the path to citizneship for those already here.  So the claims that the support for citizenship is only there because it is masked in the border security question is completley & utterly false because that particular question STATES NOTHING ABOUT BORDER SECURITY.  Most support BOTH border security and a path to citizenship as the rest of the poll suggests, but the poll also shows that most still support the path to citizenship even when border security is not even mentioned.

[Smash255]

NBC Poll

When it comes to the immigration bill, the Senate and the House of Representatives disagree with one another about what should be done on the issue of illegal immigration.
     
"Many in the House of Representatives favor strengthening security at the borders, including building a seven-hundred-mile fence along the border with Mexico to help keep illegal immigrants from entering the United States, and they favor deporting immigrants who are already in the United States illegally.
     
"Many in the Senate favor strengthening security at the borders, including building a three-hundred-and-seventy-mile fence along the border with Mexico to help keep illegal immigrants from entering the United States, and they favor a guest worker program to allow illegal immigrants who have jobs and who have been here for more than two years to remain in the United States.
     
"Which of these approaches would you prefer?"
 
      .
 
  House 33%  Senate 50%

[Smash255]

I did a little reading up on that Zogby pol you mention.  For starters the poll was from April which was before the Senate bill.  The poll also only tries to give the implication that border security is only part of the House bill, it mentions fortyfing the border in the question on the house bill, but does not mention border security in regards to the Senate Bill.  Which is completley & utterly wrong as border security is part of BOTH the House AND Senate Bills

[Smash255]

Both bills deal with border security first & foremost.  the Senate Bill is nopt filled with Empty Promises.  the felony provision in the House bill is an absolute disgrace.

Both bills main focus is Border Security. the Senate bill also offers answers of what to do with those already here.  But to suggest only one bill actually deals with border secuirty is absolute horse crap.

[Smash255]

Both bills deal with border security first & foremost.  the Senate Bill is nopt filled with Empty Promises.  the felony provision in the House bill is an absolute disgrace.

Both bills main focus is Border Security. the Senate bill also offers answers of what to do with those already here.  But to suggest only one bill actually deals with border secuirty is absolute horse crap.

The Senate bill erodes border security (I gave a specific example).  So, that's how it 'deals' with border security.

That you cannot deal with the fact that the Senate bill is hostile to border security (they don't want a real physical barrier, but rathat a theoretical 'virtual wall' which they can quickly dismantle).

I notice that you have to resort to foul language instead of citing facts.

Hmm.

Your the one who twists around all the polls to make it seem like the polls equate with your views when n fact it doesn't.  Regarding the wall, building a wall is going to do no more than a virtual wall as you state (peole can go around it, dig around it, climb it, etc).  The Bottom line is BOTH Bills deal with border security as their main focus.  they may have differnt ways of how border security should be applied, but it doesn't change the fact both bills deal with border security.  Suggesting otherwise is just false.

[Smash255]

The border is not going to be turned "off".  What the Senate bill does is offer a regulated way of dealing with those who are crossining, instead of a who knows what everyone make up your own way of handling it.


Now you are entitled to your opinion if you think the House Bill will be better for border security.  I disagree, but that is our opinions and we are each entitled to our opinions on the issue.  However to simply say the Senate Bill doesn't deal with border security is completley and absolutley false.  the way each bill handles the border security and the approach might be different, but that doesn't mean only one bill actually deals with border security, because both bills do.

[Smash255]

The Senate bill also calls for increases in the amount of border security agents, something that needed.  Moe border security agents will do more than a fence that ould be climbed over, around, etc.  Saying Bush will turn off the virtual fence is insane.  I hate the guy, and can't stand everything the right wing nutcase is for, but to suggest that the virtual wall will be shutoff is insane with no backing.  What that part of the bill does is actualy gets more people to watch the actual border rather than leaving it up to a fence. 

Again it is one thing to feel that the House bill's solution is more effective.  that is your opinion and you are entitled to it.  However, its compeltley different to simply make accusations that only one bill actually deals with border security because THEY BOTH DO.