Thread: Divided - immigration issue polarizes public in california

IMMIGRATION ISSUE POLARIZES PUBLIC IN CALIFORNIA

Hunter introduces bill to block federal lawsuit against Arizona; local activists head to Arizona for mass protest

Obama administration audits thousands of companies to force them to drop undocumented immigrant workers



By Miriam Raftery

July 23, 2010 (San Diego’s East County) –Local opponents and supporters of Arizona’s new immigration law are taking actions ranging from protests to legislation. Meanwhile, a new statewide Field poll of California voters released this week finds the public nearly evenly divided, with 49% in support and 45% opposed.

Set to take effect July 29, Arizona’s law requires police to check immigration status of anyone they suspect is in the country illegally and forces immigrants to carry documents at all time, or risk detention. Supporters contend the bill is needed to control illegal immigration. Opponents fear it will lead to racial profiling, break up families and result in harassment or detention even of lawful residents.

On July 28, a caravan of San Diego County residents is leaving for Arizona. A protest rally will be held at Chicano Park in San Diego prior to departure. The coalition, which includes Latino and human rights organization, is part of a national campaign called Standing on the Side of Love with Immigrant Families. The campaign seeks to boycott Arizona and call for comprehensive immigration reform. “We are all Arizona!” Said organizer Michelle Krug, who called on on “all people of conscience to converge on Arizona to Stop the Hate.” Opponents of Arizona’s law also called for a boycott of an Arizona Diamondbacks game in San Diego earlier this week.

The U.S. Justice Department has filed a lawsuit against Arizona seeking to stop implementation of the law, which the federal government argues interferes with federal authority. Congressman Duncan Hunter signed amicus briefs supporting Arizona’s law.

“In actuality, Arizona is doing nothing more than enforcing the laws that the federal government refuses to enforce itself,” Hunter said in a press release. "The preference of the administration to challenge Arizona while ignoring sanctuary cities is blatantly hypocritical."

The Obama administration has ramped up some enforcement efforts against employers of illegal immigrants. Earlier this month, the New York Times reported that the federal government has begun quietly cracking down on thousands of companies suspected of hiring hire undocumented workers—not with highly publicized raids, but instead by auditing employment records.

According to the Times, more than 2,900 companies have been audited by the Obama administration so far—far surpassing the number of companies that the Bush administration raided. Immigration and Customs Enforcement imposed $3 million in fines on businesses found hiring in violation and forced them to fire illegal immigrant workers—not just those caught working during the audit, but all who were found on payrolls. The government stopped short, however, of deporting immigrant workers who lacked legal status but had otherwise clean records.



Seeking to undermine the federal lawsuit, on Thursday Congressman Duncan Hunter (R-El Cajon) introduced the Sanctuary City Protection Act of 2010. The bill would prohibit the federal government from participating in the suit against Arizona unless Attorney General Eric Holder submits a plan to Congress to enforce immigration laws in any city or state that has a policy to disobey the laws.

Sanctuary cities such as Los Angeles and San Francisco have ordinances inspired by religious groups that sheltered refugees and illegal immigrants fleeing persecution from Central America in the 1980s. But Holder spokesperson Tracy Schmaler has said, “There’s a big difference between a state or a locality saying they are not going to use their resources to enforce a federal law, as so-called sanctuary cities have done, and a state passing its own immigration policy that actively interferes with federal law,” the Washington Times reported.

In 2007, President George W. Bush’s Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff told Co ngress he was not aware of any city “that actually interferes with our ability to enforce the law.”

Hunter aide Joe Kasper told the North County Times that the bill will face an uphill battle in Congress, adding that Hunter may attempt to insert the bill’s language as an amendment into an appropriations bill to force legislators to take a stand on a crackdown against sanctuary cities.

Source: http://eastcountymagazine.org/node/3849

TOn July 28, a caravan of San Diego County residents is leaving for Arizona. A protest rally will be held at "Chicano" Park in San Diego prior to departure.

Do you think the have any idea? I doubt they do.

The terms Chicano and Chicana (also spelled Xicana) were originally used by Americans in reference to U.S. citizens of Mexican descent.

Rasmussen polls are the only ones that are correct. Their are no special questions,and no spin... 64% of California Voters Say Illegal Immigrants Are Major Strain on State Budget Thursday, July 23, 2009 Email to a Friend ShareThis.Advertisement
Nearly two-out-of-three California voters (64%) say illegal immigrants put a significant strain on the state budget as lawmakers struggle to close a $26 billion deficit.

A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of California voters shows that just 25% say illegal immigrants are not a major strain on the state budget. Eleven percent (11%) are not sure.

Adults under 30 are less likely to believe illegal immigrants are a budget strain than those who are older.

Eighty-eight percent (88%) of Republicans and 67% of voters not affiliated with either major party see illegal immigrants as a serious budget strain. Democrats are evenly divided on the question.

Fifty-five percent (55%) of California voters oppose the budget deal worked out by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and state legislators from both parties. The legislature is expected to vote on the deal today.


Sixty-five percent (65%) of all voters in the state believe the availability of government money and services draws illegal immigrants to California. Twenty-two percent (22%) disagree and say the money and services are not a draw to illegal immigrants.

Men believe this more than women, whites more than blacks and those of other races.

Eighty-seven percent (87%) of GOP voters and 66% of unaffiliateds see state services and money as a magnet for illegal immigrants. Among Democrats, 49% agree, but 39% don’t think this is true.

Children of illegal immigrants who are born in the United States are eligible for welfare payments, but California voters are more closely divided over whether those benefits should be cut off because of the state budget crisis. Forty-seven percent (47%) say the welfare payments to the children of illegals should be stopped, but 39% oppose such a cut-off.

Women voters by five points are more supportive of a welfare cut-off than men.

Republicans by a two-to-one margin over Democrats favor a cut-off of welfare payments to the children of illegal immigrants. Fifty-three percent (53%) of Democrats oppose such a cut-off. A plurality of unaffiliated voters – by 16 points – supports a cut-off of the payments.

Forty-nine percent (49%) of married California voters favor a cut-off, compared to 43% who are not married. But voters with children living with them are evenly divided.

President Obama recently hosted a White House meeting to relaunch the legislative process for “comprehensiveâ€

Originally Posted by topsecret10

A sizable majority of voters consistently have said the government is not doing enough to control the borders and that border control is more important than legalizing the status of undocumented workers in the country.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_ ... ate_budget

==============================

The majority not just in California, but in every other state beyond a doubt understand the negative impact of having tens of millions of illegal aliens living in the shadows and drawing dwindling public services and are painfully aware of the invasion.

The old saying 'As goes California, so goes the rest of the country.' really did pan out after all, didn't it?