LA Chamber Spokeshole Lies About Immigration Issue
Don't cry for me Gary Toebben. The spokes-hole for the LA Chamber of Commerce is aghast that Congress might fail to pass Dubya's illegal alien amnesty plan.
He lies when he says that most Americans favor "reform:"
The legislation received support from all sides—including President George Bush, Sen. Edward Kennedy and voices from the political center. And polls show that most Americans support reform.But the truth is that barely 25% of the public supports amnesty:
A Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey conducted Monday and Tuesday night shows that just 26% of American voters favor passage of the legislation. Forty-eight percent (48%) are opposed while 26% are not sure. The bi-partisan agreement among influential Senators and the White House has been met with bi-partisan opposition among the public. The measure is opposed by 47% of Republicans, 51% of Democrats, and 46% of those not affiliated with either major party.Toebben continues:
More than 12 million undocumented individuals reside in our country, with that number growing daily.The number may be double that. But there is a simple solution to capping that growing number: enforce the laws we already have, deny Federal funds to cities that enact schemes like Special Order 40 and sanctuary laws, enforce employer sanctions and build the border fence.
The corporate interests such as the many downtown hotels, sweatshops and businesses that Toebben serves don't want our immigration laws passed. Their racist business model is dependent on creating a permanent underclass of low paid, non-English speaking workers who can bus tables, sew buttons and clean toilets. Shameful.
In related news, Tammy Bruce has a story about the "guest worker" programs in Australia. One of the biggest "industries" amnesty supports there: prostitution.
Labels: illegal immigration, la chamber
Posted by Mayor Sam @ 6/14/2007 12:17:00 PM
22 Comments:
Wow, Rasmussen hasn't been called a "poll" in years. In fact they aren't even a member of the APA -- sort of the good housekeeping seal of approval for polling firms.
However this poll is more accurate.
BLOOMBERG POLL
Large majority supports path to citizenship
A poll finds 63% of all respondents, and 65% of Republicans, back the controversial measure.
By Janet Hook
Times Staff Writer
June 13, 2007
WASHINGTON — A strong majority of Americans — including nearly two-thirds of Republicans — favor allowing illegal immigrants to become citizens if they pay fines, learn English and meet other requirements, a new Bloomberg poll has found.
That is a striking show of support for a primary element of an immigration overhaul bill that has stalled in the Senate amid conservative opposition.
Only 23% of adults surveyed opposed allowing undocumented immigrants to gain legal status. That finding bolsters the view, shared by President Bush, that the bill's opponents represent a vocal minority whereas most people are more welcoming toward illegal immigrants.
"They are willing to take jobs that our people aren't interested in, and I think this helps the economy," Joseph Simpkins, a retired dry cleaner in New Jersey who participated in the survey, said in a follow-up interview. "As long as they pay taxes, I see nothing wrong with having them become citizens."
The immigration bill, a top priority for the White House, is languishing at a time when Bush's approval rating has hit a new low: The poll, first disclosed in a new Times blog, found 34% approved of the job the president is doing, the lowest level registered by the Los Angeles Times poll throughout his time in office.
Those and other poll findings indicate a pessimistic electorate, distrustful of political and corporate leaders and unhappy with the status quo at home and abroad.
More than two-thirds of those surveyed believe the country is seriously on the wrong track, nearly matching the highest level of pessimism since 1992. Many blame U.S. oil companies and the Bush administration for high gas prices. And they have a jaundiced view of corporate chieftains, seeing them as overpaid and unethical.
"I don't know anyone who says, 'Wow! Things are going well,' " said Patricia Clark, a homemaker in Harrisburg, Pa. "It's the middle-of-the-road people like us who pay all the taxes and get hit with high gas prices. I can understand why people don't vote."
Dissatisfaction with Bush is a big part of the sour mood. His approval rating fell to 34% from 45% in September. Even among Republicans, that number was down to 70% from 83%.
Only 31% of those surveyed approved of the president's handling of the war in Iraq. And the poll found increased support for an immediate U.S. troop withdrawal: A quarter of those polled said they supported such a plan, up from 19% in January.
And the perception that the country is not moving in the right direction was more pervasive than in January, when 61% said things were on the wrong track; now 69% feel that way. Just 43% of GOP respondents said the country is moving in the right direction.
Partisan divisions are particularly pronounced in voters' views of the economy and their own financial condition. Eighty-two percent of Republican respondents said the economy is doing well, whereas 44% of Democrats shared that view. Fourteen percent of Republicans said they were worse off financially than three years ago, compared with 34% of Democrats.
The poll also found a wide gender gap in attitudes toward the economy, with men far more optimistic than women. More than two-thirds of men surveyed said the economy is doing well, compared with 49% of women.
"Sure, there are people out of work, but I do feel our economy is doing as well as I've ever seen it," said Harold Wells, a retired financial planner in Michigan. "We have 4.5% unemployment, and the stock exchange is at its highest in a while."
As gasoline prices soar over $3 a gallon, survey participants were most likely to blame U.S. oil companies and the Bush administration rather than market fluctuations. Whereas 12% said market forces were responsible for the high price of gas, 38% blamed oil companies and 21% blamed the administration.
Corporate chiefs in general were viewed with suspicion, with 81% saying they are overpaid and 33% saying they are ethical.
The immigration debate has heated up in recent weeks, with the Senate taking up — and last week putting off — the overhaul legislation. The bill aims to establish a pathway to citizenship for most of the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in the U.S. It also would create a guest worker program and institute a point system for evaluating new immigrants that would put less weight on family ties and more on applicants' skills and education.
Underscoring the urgency of the debate, 86% of people surveyed said illegal immigration was an important problem.
Although the pathway to citizenship is one of the most controversial provisions of the Senate bill, 63% of those polled backed the idea — as did 58% of those who identified themselves as conservatives and 65% of Republicans.
The survey question specified that, under the proposal, citizenship would be available only to those who registered their presence in the U.S., had no criminal record, paid a fine, got fingerprinted and learned English, among other requirements.
Those conditions helped ease concerns among some Republicans, including Michael Prandini of Fresno, who heads a homebuilders association. He said a path to citizenship without these conditions would be "unfair to the people who have gotten citizenship through the correct channels."
The guest worker program and visa point system did not draw as much support, largely because those elements of the legislation were not as well known. Forty-three percent said they did not know enough about the point system to have an opinion; 25% did not know enough about the guest worker program to weigh in.
The survey was conducted Thursday through Sunday; 1,183 adults were surveyed by telephone. The margin of sampling error was plus or minus 3 percentage points.
--
Mayor Sam - question?
Yesterday you linked to a so-called "christian blog" and in the past you have made statements on this blog informing readers of your religion - which i think is great.
But now that i read your stated opinion on "necessary workers" here in the United States and what their legal status should be, i find it to run against the grain of what the Bible leads us to do in similar situations.
I can cite several verses that literally name immigrants as our neighbor and to love them and accept them into our home, but thats not my main point. The main thrust of my argument stems from the fact that Mary & Joseph in fact "illegally" immigrated to Egypt to leave behind a brutal ruler (King Herod) who wanted to kill Jesus.
There are probably hundreds of children literally named Jesus coming to the United States everyday, to leave behind another brutal ruler "economic poverty" which is trying to kill Jesus and thousands of gods children.
I am not trying to buttress the argument the chamber is making, but i am making a totally seperate argument based on the good book and the life of our lord.
I pray your calice heart is opened up and wisdom and love is put back into it.
Along with all the other posters who come here with no sympathy or compassion in their hearts. As evident by their postings on our good Mayor.
Our prayers should be with him and his family, end of debate.
Did someone just use "accurate" to describe an LAT poll?
MUAAAAAAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
(picks self up off the floor and wipes tears)
Oh shit that was funny.
4:53
That was a Bloomberg poll you moron.
The truth is, we all want reform; we just can't agree on what form the reform ought to take.
Mayor Sam, you obviously missed the federal court ruling in Texas, that ONLY a FEDERAL AUTHORITY can determine the validity of an individual's immigration status.
Not state, or local.
You should stay off this issue, you clearly don't understand it, and propagating untruths and fantasies about reform will only serve to alienate you from your readership (many of whom may well be kin to the 'underclass' to whom you refer).
We have laws already for the illegal aliens ,ENFORCE THEM and then we talk............
7:59
Federal government enforces the immigration laws...not state or local. It is not LAPD, LASD, CHP or other NON-FEDERAL AGENTS' jobs to enforce the federal immigration laws.
First, the government is not enforcing the immigration laws.
Next, the President is leading the cause to simply ignore the fact of illegal entry and legitimize continued residence in the U.S. Other groups have the same goal. The only difference is the rationale for the push. Big business want cheap labor to do what cannot be outsourced. Others just want to avoid the prospect of returning to their country of origin.
All the local law enforcement does is their job. A lot is within their scope of authority and enforcement is a proper expectation. LAPD's Special Order 40 seems to indicate that what otherwise would be a correct exercise of law enforcement by police needs this policy created to avoid that outcome.
901's comment is a little clumsily written but he/she hits the nail on the head.
Are some of you folks saying that the local government gets to pick and choose what federal laws they enforce?
The LAPD, Sheriff's, etc. enforce federal laws all the time.
Dowd: I suppose that only a FEDERAL Authority can enforce all other FEDERAL laws, such as kidnapping, bank robbery, and counterfeiting. The only thing our local law enforcement can do, according to your logic, is direct traffic?
10:14
Who gets involved when people counterfeit money?
10:26, according to Dowd's logic, it is only the Federal Government who should enforce the anti-counterfeiting monetary laws... not local law enforcement.
10:44
Thats because the feds ARE the ones that get involved when $ is counterfeited. (Its called Secret Service)
And so the LAPD shouldn't become involved if it (the act of counterfeiting) occurs within the city limits?
7:03 you stupid sack of shit it's a Bloomberg/LAT poll.
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/front/la-na-poll13jun13,1,4502794.story?coll=la-headlines-frontpage&track=crosspromo
Hanity & Combs were outraged as were John & Ken about that bogus poll by LA SLIMES.
C'mon we all know what an idiot Matt Dowd is. He can't even get a job let alone discuss an issue. You moron LAPD enforces federal laws all the time. Let me help you Matt Dowd. LAPD can't enforce Special Issue 40 WHICH IS NOT A LAW, its an "Order" handed down by Darryl Gates. It means LAPD can't ask an immigrant about their status. However, if Judicial Watch wins their court lawsuit, then LAPD will have no choice but start enforcing the law and people who are here illegally will be reported to ICE. A lot of cities across the nation are now starting to enforce laws on the books. They have been raiding a lot of companies going after illegals who use fake documents and social security cards. Why aren't any of our idiot council members saying anything about that? They should raid LA.
2:15 - ICE should arrest all the council members AND the mayor for aiding and abetting those who have committed a Federal Crime (giving sanctuary for illegal border-crossers).
Was Villar an anchor baby? I know Nunez was, but howabout Tone Loco?
The once great Los Angeles Times
seem to be written in Mexico City these days.
Not one LEGAL Los Angeles Citizen believes anything they say!
Sam Zell needs to find a whole new
staff!
Pandering to the illegals, as with those who want to deny Bratton a 2nd term when upto the day before the May 1 melee (that's a communist workers' day, by the way, shows the way-left bent of the organizers -- they think they're some sort of oppressed proletariat, have to overthrow their oppressors to gain true equality, bla - bla) really is a disgrace. But it's not antonio who's leading that; there are plenty of white ACLU libs and the council is full of bleeding hearts like Hahn and Rosendahl who make eloquent speeches about oppression around the world and in our city, stuff over which they can grandstand but have no legislative authority: so how could antonio be seen as anti-immigrant? He's tried to be balanced about it, speaking at their events, but urging kids to stay in school instead of marching, etc. frankly, i feel better about his handling of "his" own people than I would with some liberal-guilt white ninny who'd cave to any pressure. And isn't it the conservative Bush and his business lobby, who want the most liberal legalization, to keep their cheap work force coming? And yet, the public actually thinks priority should be given to those who wait their turn in long "ques" that take years: educated Indians, Asians and poor but highly educated East Europeans among them.
Meanwhile, it's so hard to get visas to visit our country that it's been reported, Europeans and Japanese and other wealthy Asians with money to spend, and who look to us as trend-setters, forego coming to this country because of the red tape. THAT'S what tony and the rest of them ought to be devoting themselves to. They went to Asia, but why aren't the tourists and investors coming? Get Arnold the Republican to work with locals on easing red tape in D. C.; get rich tourists & investors.
Instead, Janice Hahn persuades her city hall colleagues to pass bills that would drive away investment, and make L A seem more interested in pandering to illegals than to being fiscally responsible. And Alarcon bashes the "rich" taxpayers while Zine bashes his colleagues...
The school board pays 400K to a guy from out of state who's never been an education, cuz he's "enthusiastic," and 7 months later, he gets a Big Idea: create a task force to think up ways to fix the schools. Wow! And some wonder where all that enthusiasm went...
Given this bunch, it really is only a spunky, tireless guy like Mayor Tony who can try to get things done from city hall to the schools.
Here's how Hong Kong handles getting cheap workers for jobs like maids and busboys from the Philippines and other countries: it's totally un- PC and would never fly here, but just to give a vastly different example.
Workers come out on two-year visas, after being arranged through an employment agency, and the average wage for these jobs is 500-600/month. But the employer has to guarantee the government that the workers have someplace to live, at least a dorm bed, which meets certain basic standards. IF the employees are fired, they have two weeks to find another job or be sent back home. That wage wouldn't fly here, but it is win-win for the employers and workers, and either party can terminiate it. (How much sense does it make for Mexicans who are lucky to make 10 bucks a day there, march for "living wages" even as illegals, on the grounds that the cost of living is so high?) Of course, this works better for singles saving up money.
But given how much garment workers make by the piece and how they live, some would be better off. (Of course, some H K workers make more and are treated like family by those who want them to stay on.)
Pretty much takes care of any possibility that anyone who commits a crime will be rehired. Whereas here, Order 40 or whatever it is, almost ensures that we can't get rid of even the worst gang members and criminals. And with illegals here hiding from the law, in some cases they can be taken advantage of yet be afraid to report it. At least the H K system requires everyone to be above-board.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home