Contact Us

Commentary




 

The Immigration Moment


by:

Anna Greenberg, Ph.D.

Senior Vice President

Email Commentary

x   close

The Immigration Moment

Anna Greenberg

10/16/2006. Along with taxes and security, immigration represents one of the pillars of Republican attacks on Democratic attacks this year. Regardless of the district or state, an inflammatory attack on Democra ...

*Your Name*Required fields


*Your Email Address


*Recipient's Email Address








The email addresses you enter will ONLY be used to send
this commentary and let the recipient know who sent it.

10/16/2006. Along with taxes and security, immigration represents one of the pillars of Republican attacks on Democratic attacks this year. Regardless of the district or state, an inflammatory attack on Democrats for allegedly supporting amnesty and Social Security benefits for illegal immigrants fill the airways and mailboxes. But the data are not so clear that attacking Democrats on immigration is terribly effective, at least in many races. While many Americans hold hostile views towards immigrants and are deeply disturbed by the notion that illegal immigrations receive government benefits (which is not entirely true), the debate as it has played out has not necessarily benefited Republicans.

In a recent national survey, we found that Democrats actually have an advantage on the immigration issue among all voters, and Independents, in particular. Moreover, in an exercise where we test two statements -- one that presents the Republican attack on Democrats for supporting amnesty and benefits for illegal immigrants and one that presents the Democratic argument that is supportive of border security and points out the federal failure on immigration -- the Democrat wins the argument by healthy margin.

The Republican failure to effectively exploit anti-immigrant views stems from the fact that the issue has more nuance than "amnesty versus no amnesty." While many voters believe illegal immigration is a real problem, they have real differences about the right solution. For example, no matter how many activists support the "security fence" along the border, voters have real questions about its effectiveness and cost. Many also agree that simply deporting 11 million illegal immigrants is not practical and some believe it would be inhumane. Republicans have also been divided on the issue and are not speaking with a clear voice; most national polls going into the mid-term elections showed that Bush and the Republican had no clear political advantage on the immigration issue, in part because of the conflict between Bush, McCain and the House.

Finally, some Republicans are challenged by just sounding too extreme (not to mention alienating Hispanic voters). I would point to Arizona's 8th district as an example where extreme views on immigration have hurt the Republican candidate (full disclosure: I work for the Democratic candidate, former state senator Gabrielle Giffords). But even in other races where the issue is fully engaged by less extreme candidates on immigration -- the PA Senate race, IL 6th, and IN 2nd are some examples -- Democrats have certainly weathered the attacks or even increased their leads after being attacked on immigration. At the end of the day, other issues might simply be crowding out immigration in these competitive races, but I would argue that Republicans have miscalculated the power of the issue and that Democrats have strong arguments that counter their attacks.

Note: this article was originally posted on the pollster.com website, October 16, 2006.