Thread: Immigration rallies: Do they help or hurt cause?

http://www.sacbee.com/content/politics/ ... 1363c.html

Immigration rallies: Do they help or hurt cause?
By Margaret Talev -- Bee Washington Bureau
Published 2:15 am PDT Wednesday, April 12, 2006
WASHINGTON - A day after another wave of protest rallies swept the nation on the issue of immigration, evidence was mixed Tuesday on whether the unexpectedly large turnout of immigrants and their supporters had helped or hurt their cause.

In a first test of public sentiment, a Zogby poll released Tuesday found 61 percent of likely American voters felt less sympathetic to the plight of illegal immigrants after seeing the first round of demonstrations, including the massive, Mexican-flag-waving protest in Los Angeles on March 25. Just 32 percent of the nearly 8,000 people surveyed between March 31 and April 3 said the protests made them more sympathetic.

At the same time, a joint statement issued Tuesday by House Speaker Dennis Hastert and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist suggested both may be concerned that the Republican Party is being seen as too stridently opposed to illegal immigrants.

A House bill passed last year would subject an estimated 11 million illegal immigrants to felony prosecutions, but the statement from Hastert and Frist says, "It remains our intent to produce a strong border security bill that will not make unlawful presence in the United States a felony."

Cristina Lopez, deputy executive director of the Center for Community Change, which helped organize the marches nationally on Monday, said the rallies "have had an influence. ... With all this activism, now we're starting to hear folks saying, 'We didn't mean it when we said we're going to make these guys felons.' You're starting to see some backpedaling now on the part of Congress. I really think it is because of the rallies and marches."

But pollster John Zogby said that, while the rallies had echoes of the civil rights demonstrations four decades ago, their short-term impact was to jostle everyone. "The demonstrations broke an important taboo," he said, "not unlike the very early civil rights demonstrations. It's making an invisible issue very visible. They made both sides very uncomfortable."

Hundreds of thousands of people turned out for Monday's rallies in scores of American cities, intent on deterring legislation that would criminalize undocumented residents and their employers, landlords or priests, while supporting provisions that would allow a path to citizenship. Pollsters noted a sharp shift in tone at Monday's rallies, in which American flags and pro-American themes were more prominent.

The pollsters said it was unclear whether the rallies would be received more favorably by the general public or by congressional lawmakers who are to re-engage in the debate later this month when they return from a recess.

Democratic pollster Celinda Lake said when Mexican flags emerged during the protests against anti-illegal immigration Proposition 187 in California in 1994, there was a backlash. She saw shades of that in last month's protests.

But this week, she said, the message was that "these are people who are very loyal to America, who want to become citizens. The visuals with the flags, I think that was very important."

Rep. Dan Lungren, R-Gold River, a member of the House Judiciary Committee, said Monday's protests probably were less inflammatory than those last month in the eyes of those opposed to guest worker programs or citizenship for the undocumented.

Even so, he said, "I'm not sure some Americans who saw the protests in Washington, D.C., being largely conducted in Spanish would be encouraged by that.

A lot of people think the default language of the United States should be English."

Lungren, who supported the House immigration bill passed last year but also favors a guest worker or limited residency component, said the size of the turnouts at recent demonstrations cuts both ways: "It shows strong support from some to grant legalized status, and on the other hand you have people saying, 'Look how large that number is, we don't dare do it!' "

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pa., who favors a compromise that would grant citizenship to some undocumented residents, issued a statement Monday saying Congress "should not be unduly influenced by marches" and warning "it may be counterproductive for demonstrators to talk about 'immigrants rights' or 'demands for citizenship.' "

The protests sprang up last month as the Senate began its debate. The measure passed by the House last year did not create a guest worker program or expand citizenship opportunities but called for walling off the Mexico border and opened the door to prosecuting undocumented residents and those who harbor or employ them.

Some senators favor a similar plan, while others want one more accommodating to longtime illegal residents free of criminal records and to businesses that want to hire cheap, temporary labor.

Between the first wave of street protests and the second, attempts at forging a compromise broke down, with Republican leaders blaming Democrats for stalling, although infighting among Republicans also contributed to the breakdown.

Chung-Wha Hong, executive director of the New York Immigration Coalition, helped organize demonstrators there this week.

"I feel it was a major turning point yesterday," she said Tuesday.

"I'm not surprised at negative reaction now, but time will tell.

"I think congressional members are behind in understanding what's happening. But there's no way someone who's witnessed the last few weeks can go back to the table with the same policy arguments they were making a few weeks ago."


About the writer:

It definitely made a 'difference.' It woke up many Americans to the numbers of illegals that have sneaked in...it infuriated many that we are now down to 'legislation via intimidation'....it isn't 'inconclusive' at all. Americans are ANGRY, AWAKE, and READY TO ROLL.

MJ
(formerly RoadRunner)