- July 29, 2010

Fox News Poll: 72 Percent Say Government Not Enforcing Immigration Laws

Most American voters believe the federal government is failing to enforce the country's immigration laws, according to a Fox News poll released Thursday. In addition, voters are more likely to favor than oppose Arizona's new immigration law that was in large part blocked by a federal judge this week.

Arizona officials say they passed the law because the federal government was failing to enforce existing law against illegal entry into the United States. Most voters agree: 72 percent say the government is not enforcing existing laws, including majorities of Republicans (86 percent), independents (72 percent) and Democrats (59 percent).

-------------------------
"Fathom the odd hypocrisy that Obama wants every citizen to prove
they are insured, but people don't have to prove they are citizens."

~ Ben Stein

Not many intelligent people are arguing that point. What they are saying is that our federal laws need reform. It will cost more money to enforce the current laws adequately, which you, as a conservative, do not want to spend. Sure, AZ can enact this law, but it won't do anything either. Are the local cops gonna drive the Mexicans back themselves? Do they drop them off at the ICE office and let them take care of it? But we already know they don't have the resources to do their job as it is. DOH!

As a conservative, I say abolish federal immigration law all together. I would be happy to let the states (or even counties) decide for themselves and keep the feds out of it altogether. Small business would boom in areas that could use immigrant labor, and small businesses are the NUMBER 1 creator of jobs.

-------------------------
I don't avoid women, Mandrake, but I do deny them my essence.

^^^^Goes to show you some people don't do homework (or just don't know)^^^^

Do you even know what would happen then Brody? Are you Joking?

-------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Where are we going....... and... why are we in a hand basket?
What luck for rulers that men do not think!
Adolph Hitler

Further proof that Fox viewers don't know shit.

-------------------------
"Born fine the first time."

I don't do homework anymore, as I've said before, I graduated college last year with a degree in economics. I tend to post my opinion on certain matters, as it saves me the burden of having to post sources as supposed 'facts' that all to often clog up the interwebs.

To answer your question, what would happen if enforcement ofimmigration laws was shifted to state and local governments rather than multiple federal departments (which 72% of Americans seem to feel aren't doing there job, according to the article), I feel that a variety of different things would occur.

I do not have a crystal ball, so I cannot say with certainty what would happen in any hypothetical situation. However, I think that it would give more power to the citizenry in particular areas to enforce laws as they see fit. In turn, areas that chose to be more lenient toward immigrants would attract a higher immigrant population. If Alabama wants not to punish undocumented workers, let them have it. Their businesses will benefit by paying an otherwise illegal wage, and they will be responsible for dealing with the shifting demographics. If Florida wants to send illegal aliens back to Mexico or over to Alabama, let them do it and be responsible for it. I would simply prefer that the federal government, which has proven itself to be incompetent in this issue, stop wasting tax dollars and not addressing the problem, and not to give them more money to continue on the same path. The states can better address their own issues, rather than a strong central government.

Which begs the question, if you are in favor of a stronger central government, doesn't that mean that you are a liberal? Or at least a statist? Methinks that you posture as a conservative, but when push comes to shove, you will quickly disavow your stance and beg the nanny state to take care of the problems facing your local community.

Please share your opinion as to why I am incorrect in any instance. I am more than willing to listen and will readily admit to any valid point you make.

 

-------------------------
I don't avoid women, Mandrake, but I do deny them my essence.

No reply?


-------------------------
"Born fine the first time."

While the administration focuses on some illegal immigrants with criminal records, others are allowed to remain free, creating a "sense of impunity. As long as they keep their heads down, they're in the clear. That's no way of enforcing immigration law," said Mark Krikorian, a supporter of stricter policies with the Center for Immigration Studies.

"Even the ones who haven't committed murder or rape or drug offenses, all of them have committed federal felonies," Krikorian said. He favors employer audits, but also the roundups that Obama has largely abandoned.

-------------------------

 

Bribing the electorate with their own money!

Yo, Brody...

If you legally shift the burden of immigration enforcement to The state Guvments, you end up with a thousand different laws depending on what state, county and city you happen to be in. There will be lawsuits all over the country that Arizona just threw 100 Alabama workers over the border, Florida just sentenced 10 illegal workers who were on vacation from Georgia to 5 years hard labor picking crops....

In Houston cops are required to check felons citizenship, but in SanAntonio they have to provide felons with work permits and temporary visas and in Dallas if you go to the Democratic Campaign Headquarters you get sworn in as a citizen get your voter ID card and welfare check.

Other Countries would start sending their terminally sick patients to Dallas where there is no laws preventing somebody with Aids or Ebola or the Plauge from walking in and making themselves at home....

If locallitys could pass their own immigration laws, then 50 legal immigrants can incorporate a town on the border, pass a law stating that anybody who has dry feet is automatically a citizen, and issue legal papers to every Juan Dick and Harry that walks in the door.

72 percent of Americans don't have a clue about half the facts in these issues.

Personally don't care if Juan Valdez wants to grow coffee beans here, as long as he's legal! Many of our great grandparents or maybe parents who came to America landed at Ellis Island. Why the double standard?? If they want to be here......play by the rules or get outa here!

I'm thinking some of you should get with the program and drop all this "But, but, they're illegal" crap. Really.

People who drive without a license are doing so illegally. You don't hear people shouting about "illegal drivers," do you?

Look, the government long ago stopped calling them illegal aliens, opting instead for the kinder and gentler (and more obfuscating) "undocumented workers." You should do the same. Other more acceptable adjectives are unauthorized, unsanctioned, and unlicensed.



-------------------------
"Fathom the odd hypocrisy that Obama wants every citizen to prove
they are insured, but people don't have to prove they are citizens."

~ Ben Stein

Your joking right?

even I can see the sarcasm dripping from that one daner

-------------------------
check it ! another ride
-------------------------------
I think we have a new breed of "armchair" hero, bulldawgy is an "armchair patriot"

Can anyone point me to a FOX Entertainment news poll about illegal immigration during the time period of 2000 - 2007?

Thanks for the info.



Edited: 08/01/2010 at 05:06 AM by theglide

CROSS COUNTRYJULY 31, 2010 Young Illegals Out Themselves, Daring To Be Deported Civil disobedience by students adds a new twist to the immigration debate. By JOHN-CLARK LEVIN On July 20, 22 young illegal immigrants in caps and gowns entered the Hart Senate Office Building in Washington, D.C., and began sit-ins in the offices of several senators. Twelve soon returned to the atrium, where they formed a circle around a banner reading "Undocumented and Unafraid." Refusing to be moved, the students were arrested by Capitol Police, as were nine others who had stayed put in the offices of Sen. John McCain and Majority Leader Harry Reid. Less than two miles away, a similar protest by a separate but allied group was taking place at Lafayette Square in front of the White House. These students went a step further. Openly announcing their immigration status and giving their full names just across the Mall from Immigration and Customs Enforcement headquarters, they forced a difficult choice upon ICE officials. Take no action, and ICE would undermine the law. But come down hard by deporting the students, many of them still teenagers, and it would risk drawing overwhelming public outcry. These individuals - plus several hundred more high school and college students of illegal status - had come to the capital to call for passage of the floundering Dream Act. Dream, the Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors Act, co-sponsored by 36 senators, including Dick Durbin (D., Ill.) and Richard Lugar (R., Ind.), would offer temporary residency to students who arrived in the U.S. illegally as minors if they attend college. It would grant them permanent residency upon graduating. Young people have come to the capital every year since 2001 to demonstrate in support of the act. But many senators suggest that the bill remains five votes short of the 60 needed for cloture, and it has slim prospects of being passed during this session of Congress. So in order to draw greater attention to their cause, affected students decided to undertake a risky form of civil disobedience. If arrested, they faced deportation. Yet ICE has stated that it has no intention of initiating deportation proceedings against the students arrested in the Washington protests. The officials likely wanted to avoid a repeat of what happened last month with a Harvard student named Eric Balderas. View Full Image Associated Press Mr. Balderas had deportation proceedings opened against him after authorities discovered his status as he was passing through security at an airport. The case attracted widespread media attention and international backlash. Harvard administrators stated their support for Mr. Balderas, whose case was soon taken up by Mr. Durbin. After less than two weeks, ICE backed down, halting Mr. Balderas's deportation indefinitely. Hoping the sit-in will fade from the public view, ICE is sticking to the safe line that the students' actions in Washington simply "illustrate the need for comprehensive immigration reform," as spokesperson Gillian Brigham told me. Yet this strikes many on Capitol Hill as an inexcusable failure to enforce the law. "It's outrageous," California Rep. Gary Miller told the Orange County Register. "How can you have a protest right in a U.S. senator's office, admit you are here illegally in violation of the law, and we pat you on the back and do nothing?" But even doing nothing stands to strengthen the "Dreamers." Pictures of these students protesting with impunity are already making an impression on students of illegal status from coast to coast, spreading the movement with the aid of social networking websites. With that momentum, the activists intend to maintain a continuous presence in the capital. One organizer, Mo Abdollahi, who was brought to America illegally from Iran as a child, told me that the protests will go on "as long as it takes" for Dream to pass. At the same time, Mr. Abdollahi disputes the notion that these actions are deliberate provocations in the mold of Gandhi or King. He says that the Dreamers are "just trying to live [their] lives." If that means deportation, he says, it is a price they are willing to pay. Is their goal to force another public deportation crisis like that of Eric Balderas? "We are not deliberately trying to do that," he claims. If the students' civil disobedience brings the force of the law down upon them, he says, that is simply a hazard of their activism. Other student leaders told me that there is more calculation behind the actions in Washington. But whether these activists are naïve or calculating, their effectiveness is impossible to dispute. The protests this month are most significant not because of any direct influence they may have on lawmakers, but because they are drawing other young people with illegal status out into the open, undoing the chilling effect that legal vulnerability has long had on illegal immigrants' political activism. As the fall elections near, such activism will likely serve as another flash point for an already volatile issue. Mr. Levin, winner of the 2010 Eric Breindel Collegiate Journalism Award, is an intern at the Journal this summer.[/]

-------------------------
"Fathom the odd hypocrisy that Obama wants every citizen to prove
they are insured, but people don't have to prove they are citizens."

~ Ben Stein

Actually they should be called "undocumented Democraps"!

-------------------------

 

Bribing the electorate with their own money!

You know, since FOX is so concerned with bringing us the truth that the librul media hides from us.  Perhaps they can compile an accurate table of arrests and deportations executed by the feds over the last 10 or so years and break it down by region and/or state. 

Of course I would like to see some digging into why some companies get slapped for having illegal labor and not others.  In the early 2000's the scallop dredge fishery in the northeast started staffing a lot of its vessels with illegals.  The boats based out of Hampton Roads that dredge off New Jersey were almost all staffed by illegals save the captain and first mate.  This is at a time when the quota system and area closures had stocks built strong (one company owner, my parents' neighbor, said "the scallops must be piled 5 feet deep on the bottom" they were filling their holds so fast").  Owners were making millions.  The illegals were such a rough and nasty bunch though that the grad students that were working as observers for NMFS started to hate going out.  Anyway, out of three companies that were all using mostly illegals, only one got busted by the feds and had to pay a several million dollar fine and have his bookkeeper go to jail.  Why did his company get singled out?  Did he get sloppy?  Did he piss off the wrong agent?  Did he not pay off somebody he needed to pay off?  Same thing has happenned in the meat packing industry with selective enforcement when they're all guilty as hell.  I'd like to know what's up with that.

-------------------------

...

Hey, maybe the feds could provide those stats huh?  No one here is against busting businesses that hire illegals...we just want all the laws enforced?  Got a problem with that scallop boy?

Im going to go with the highlighted, underlined phrase for $2,000,000 for both the fishery and meat packing.

-------------------------
check it ! another ride
-------------------------------
I think we have a new breed of "armchair" hero, bulldawgy is an "armchair patriot"

Damn you libs can't see the forest for the trees.