Support for Arizona Immigration Law Solid Despite Progressive Bashing
by Bill Dusty
Liberal activists from across the country continue to hammer Arizona for its new immigration law – a piece of legislation that has been vilified because it calls on the state’s law enforcement agencies to actually enforce current federal immigration laws.
Heaven forbid.
Even their God-King, President Barack Obama, has hopped onto the bandwagon and repeatedly bashed Arizona – a state he is supposed to be representing – in front of foreign leaders. (Yes, Mr. President, you are the president of all of the States in the Union, not just the ones you agree with.) The ultimate hypocrisy came when none other than Mexican President Felipe Calderon criticized Arizona’s immigration law – despite the fact that his own country practices the same policy – only with a good measure of corruption added into the mix.
Unfortunately for all of the ranting and raving, it turns out that a solid majority of Americans still support Arizona’s efforts to control its borders and enforce laws that the federal government seems hell-bent on ignoring.
Throughout the month of May, news headlines came out showing at least 60% approval ratings for Arizona’s stand on immigration, and over that percentage for overall immigration enforcement.
- Reuters: Study shows broad support for Arizona migrant law (May 12)
- PBS: Arizona Immigration Law Has Broad Support Across U.S., New Polls Show (May 13)
- NewsBusters.com: NBC Astonished Polls Shows Most Support Arizona Law (May 15).
- Pew research polling results on immigration enforcement, from May, 2010.
Those are not ignorant or racist people supporting immigration laws. Those are responsible citizens who are expecting their government to look out for them and to represent their interests. How ironic it is that at the same time the federal government is pushing its authority into the arena of states rights in other areas (e.g. healthcare), it seems equally determined to dismiss its own confirmed Constitutional obligation to secure our borders.
Enforcing federal immigration laws and insisting that immigrants enter and live in this country legally – as many tens of thousands do every year – is not racist or hateful. (At least we don’t put illegal immigrants in fenced-in camps like France did.) It is what responsible countries do to maintain order and ensure that their societies function properly – with citizens providing a tax base in order for elected government to provide services (and in the Feds case, protection) to those citizens. To insist that the U.S. should allow free, unrestricted immigration is just daydreamy Utopianism (since in a perfect world, everyone from everywhere would have an income, security, and a home – all without effort) and flat-out irresponsible. Critics of the Arizona immigration law say that it opens up the possibility of racial profiling and police harassment (which the law itself specifically forbids). Well, guess what, folks? The enforcement of ANY law brings with it that possibility. Do we stop enforcing our litter laws in minority-populated inner-city neighborhoods simply because most people cited would be black or Latino?
The federal government is failing in its obligation to protect the integrity of our borders. Furthermore, it has given itself authority in other areas of our society that are, at the least, Constitutionally questionable. Arizona has a right to act on its own behalf when others refuse to do so. And if the federal government continues to ignore our border security, other states should follow Arizona’s lead.
| Share |
PDF
7 Responses for “Support for Arizona Immigration Law Solid Despite Progressive Bashing”
Comments are closed
ADVERTISE AT THE SI
 |
 |
Bill,
Public opinion about the Arizona law can be viewed from multiple perspectives, each one suggesting a somewhat more or less troubling reality. For example, when you consider the percentages of respondents in a survey on the question who lack specific knowledge of the law, the question arises; On what are they basing their support or opposition to the law?
Very few people seem to know that the law was amended shortly after it first passed in ways intended to repair it’s widely reported flaws. Sadly, this seems to indicate that support and opposition is largely just knee-jerk bias on the part of supporters and opponents alike.
Well Jerold, we have to go with the information that’s available to us. Pew Research is a pretty well respected firm. It’s funny how polling is viewed by folks depending on how the results come out. When pollsters come out with poll results that back liberal perspectives, I don’t hear anyone from the Left complaining about a lack of knowledgeable respondents.
In any event, since the Arizona immigration law first made the headlines, I have never heard of any study done anywhere that indicates a majority of Americans dislike this law.
The Pew poll asked separate questions on immigration enforcement, hence the reason why less respondents supported the Arizona law (about 60%) than did stricter immigration enforcement overall (in the upper 60% to 70% range). Here is a link to the poll results. (I also added it to the link listing in the story.)
Bill,
You’ve misunderstood me. I am not refuting Pew’s results! Nothing in my post suggested that Pew’s results are an any way invalid.
You’ve apparently made the mistake of assuming that I was making a “partisan” comment. Read it again and Im sure you will recognize that my point is neither pro or con, regarding the statute, rather it is a fairly indisputable comment about the limits of public opinion as a guide to substantive policy options, a point I can assure you would be wholey supported by Pew and every other reputable pollster.
Simply “going with the information available” is a huge problem in American public opinion research because most available information is not very informative. Media and information literacy are VERY important in the present information environment and unfortunately “illiteracy” on this score is rampant.
Jerold Duquette
Hi Jerold,
My story was all about public opinion being supportive of Arizona’s law even though there are some very loud progressive voices that are against it. As evidence of this, I produced polling results as well as media stories.
It seems from your first comment (first paragraph) that you are dismissing (or at least suspect of) the poll results as being the result of people lacking knowledge of the facts (either in opposition to or in support of the law). Hence my reference, “we have to go with what’s available.” I was referring to my own ability to show evidence of public opinion one way or the other. Polling is the only way to do this, regardless of how well-informed or ill-informed the respondents are. And the questions in this case, as a whole, were pretty straight forward.
One of the questions Pew asked in their poll went something like, “Do you want to see stricter enforcement of America’s immigration laws?” The response was overwhelmingly “yes” (in the 70-percentage, I believe). I just can’t see that being dismissed as being not very informative. I think it’s quite telling.
(I should mention: I actually do know quite a bit about polling. I’ve read studies on the industry, as well as an informative book entitled, “The Opinion Makers,” which delves into how polling companies work and how they can skew poll results by styling the questions in certain ways.)
I’ll give it one more try. My comment was meant to show “another perspective” on public opinion, one that disputes neither the Pew poll or your reasonable conclusion that a majority supports the Arizona law. The question I raised is “why?” how much of the support AND OPPOSITION to the law is informed, and how much of it is uninformed? Did the Pew poll screen for level of relevant knowledge of the statute?
I am interested in the quality of public opinion and like so many issues the vast majority of information about the Arizona statute, or even illegal immigration in general, is dumbed down for mass consumption, making it easier to register valid opinion, but harder to measure the reasonableness of opinion. Pew could have, even may have, civic knowledge cross-tabs- I didn’t read the poll. If they did, I would think that data just as important as the superficial support of a get tough on illegal immigration attitude.
Alrighty, Jerold.
SAD DAY FOR AMERCA AND ITS CITIZENS WHEN MEXICAN ILLEGALS RIGHTS TRUMP THIER RIGHTS IS THE UNITED GONE FROM UNITED STATES
OBAMA HAS SENT A MESSAGE TO ILLEGALS PACK YOUR BACKS AND HEAD FOR AMERICA