7 GOPers who need immigration vote

By JAMES ARKIN | 7/9/13 2:27 PM EDT
POLITICO

http://images.politico.com/global/20...mpy_328_ap.jpg
These lawmakers may be less likely to win re-election if they don't support reform. | AP Photos

Some Republican congressmen might face a tougher path to reelection in 2014 if immigration reform doesn’t pass in the House this year, according to a new poll released Tuesday.

Voters in seven GOP-held congressional districts would be less likely to vote for their current representative if he doesn’t support immigration reform, according to the poll from Public Policy Polling. The number of voters who would be less likely to support their current congressman ranged from 40 to 47 percent, while the number of voters who would be more likely ranged from 19 to 31 percent.

Voters also said they were less likely to support Republican candidates in general next year if the GOP House members block the current immigration reform proposal.

The seven representatives — Jeff Denham, David Valadao and Gary Miller, all of California, Mike Coffman of Colorado, John Kline of Minnesota, Joe Heck of Nevada and Mike Grimm of New York — each serve in a district with overwhelming support for the Senate’s immigration reform plan, ranging from 61 to 69 percent, the poll found.

At least three-quarters of voters surveyed in each district said they think it is important the U.S. immigration system is fixed this year.

All of the surveys were conducted between July 5 and 7. PPP polled 837 likely voters in California’s 10th district, 552 in California’s 21st district, 657 in California’s 31st district, 692 in Colorado’s 6th district, 696 in Minnesota’s 2nd district, 544 in Nevada’s 3rd district and 543 in New York’s 11th district. The margins of error were plus or minus 3.4, 4.2, 3.8, 3.7, 3.7, 4.2 and 4.2 percentage points, respectively.

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/0...894.html?hp=r9

3:17 AM 07/10/2013
Mickey Kaus
The Daily Caller

All Hands on Deck for Amnesty, Chapter XVIII: Politico is currently promoting a poll from Public Policy Polling (PPP) that allegedly shows seven ”key Republicans could be in trouble if the House doesn’t pass immigration reform this year” because there is “overwhelming support” for the legislation in their districts.

The poll is comically biased. Here is the first question:

There is bipartisan immigration reform
legislation being debated in Washington. The
bill would secure our borders, block employers
from hiring undocumented immigrants, and
make sure that undocumented immigrants
already in the U.S. with no criminal record
register for legal status. If a long list of
requirements is met over more than a decade,
it provides eligibility for a path to citizenship.

Would you support or oppose this proposal?

They really weren’t taking any chances, were they? … The amazing thing is that 28% of the voters were ornery enough to oppose this fabulous collection of prospective achievements. And because that’s the first question it of course colors all the answers that follow. (“Let’s say Congressman Jeff Denham voted against [this wonderful plan]. Would that make you more or less likely …?”)

But actually, Question 2 is just as bad:

Do you support or oppose an immigration
reform plan that ensures undocumented
immigrants currently living in the U.S. pay a
penalty, learn English, pass a criminal
background check, pay taxes, and wait a
minimum of thirteen years ars before they can be
eligible for citizenship?

The question conveniently omits mentioning the key dealbreaker Gang of 8 provision that legalizes undocumented immigrants virtually immediately, in 6 months or so (though they may wait 13 years for citizenship).

Also, the plan doesn’t “ensure undocumented immigrants … pay a penalty” (it can be waived).

It doesn’t ensure they learn English (they only have to sign up for a course).

It doesn’t ensure they pass a background check (there aren’t enough personnel to perform real background checks on 8 million immigrants), it doesn’t collect back taxes and many undocumented immigrants–agricultural workers and DREAMers–won’t have to “wait a minimun” of thirteen years (they’re on a faster track).

In other words, every clause in the question is more or less a lie, at least if it purports to describe “immigration reform” legislation currently being pushed in Congress, which it does.

Any Congressman who makes a decision on the basis of this poll is too stupid to be reelected anyway.

P.S.: P.P.P. may be a fine outfit. But ethical standards tend to go out the window when “comprehensive immigration reform” is at stake. After all, who opposes it except obstructionist Republicans and racist yahoos? No harm no foul! And who’s going to call P.P.P. on it? …

Plus, they’re getting a bit desperate.

P.P.S.: Why would Politico unquestioningly hype this survey? Are they part of the unanimous high-minded elite consensus on this issue, or will they unquestioningly hype anything that’s handed to them? I admit I’m stumped by that one. …

http://dailycaller.com/2013/07/10/fa...ll-of-the-day/