Immigration Poll Results Suggest Feds Have Work To Do

The good folks over at Rasmussen released the interesting results of their latest poll on immigration, with many questions directly addressing the Obama administration's handling of the Arizona immigration law. Among other headline-worthy numbers, it appears that 56% of those polled disagree with the Administration's handling of the issue. Rasmussen also reported that 61% of those polled would favor a similar law in their home states. The survey of 1,000 likely voters was conducted on July 6-7, and has a margin of sampling error of +/- 3 percentage points.

Blawgconomics has noted its fondness in the past for the old cliche about lies and statistics. It is quite possible that at least some of the folks in the pro-Arizona camp were merely expressing dissatisfaction with the Administration in general. Additionally, the category 'likely voters' may capture folks who will hit the polls this November, but it is also very likely for obvious reasons to miss some of the millions who are most dissatisfied with the law, giving slightly skewed results. There might also still be a lot of people out there who merely hold the idea of 1700's-era states' rights in such high esteem that they would side with Arizona no matter what the law was. As is so often the case with statistics, they can be misleading. Ultimately, the different sides of any debate will be able to paint different pictures using whatever numbers from whatever polls are most amenable to their conclusions.

Maybe there is some relevance to the numbers however; maybe there are some conclusions which can be drawn. For all of the hot air about the legality of the Arizona bill, many average Americans might be surprised to see that many of its provisions cite directly back to existing federal law. Additionally, despite the numbers suggesting support for the bill above, Rasmussen notes that, '...59% of all voters favor a welcoming immigration policy that excludes only national security threats, criminals and those who would come here to live off the U.S. welfare system. Twenty-five percent (25%) disagree with such an immigration policy, and 15% more are undecided.'

This could lead one to the conclusion that Americans, a vast majority of whom are in the country as a direct result of a historic familial visit to Ellis Island, are in favor of immigration, so long as it is regulated. Essentially, if the federal government were doing a better job of enforcing its own laws, protecting the borders from criminals and drug smugglers, laws like Arizona's would not be necessary, an ageing population could be replenished by hungry and hard working neighbors from the south, and the country could continue to prosper. Too often Washington-types intermingle the terms 'immigrant' and 'illegal immigrant.' Apparently average Americans are better able to make that distinction.

In an era of 24 hour news networks, the internet, global newspapers and globalized media, it is not difficult to get statistics from a reputable source to back up just about any conclusion one wants to make on nearly any topic. However, one conclusion is clear from the above poll numbers; Americans feel that their government should spend less time worrying about lawsuits and more time taking the type of action that would have made Arizona's law unnecessary in the first place. Immigration is, and always has been, a critical ingredient in the melting pot of America, and will continue to be critical in a future that will be marked by an ageing demographic and the resulting rise in entitlements. However, immigration needs to be regulated. If the federal government doesn't want states to be responsible for that regulation, then, by all means, get on with it.