Local Paper: The Times Presents Flawed Immigration Poll as Important

Any poll is only as good and accurate as the questions they ask.  The old computer saying GIGO (standing for: garbage in, garbage out) from any objective view would fit the poll done by Harper Polling.  Without looking at the validity of the primary questions Harper asked in their immigration poll, The Times runs a news story headlined “Poll finds most Hoosiers support Senate Immigration plan.

Lets  look at the questions and dissect them as any good American should do:

Question 1:

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?

Does the actual legislation do what is claimed in the polling question?  The current legislation in the Senate does not contain language which specifically dictates how the borders are to be secured.

Current law requires operational control of our borders; operational control means that 90% of people illegally trying to cross in to the United States are apprehended.  We have yet to meet this standard in border security. So what does the Senate bill do?  The bill lessens the standard to secure high-risk sectors.  Does anyone honestly believe that these “high risk” areas won’t just move down the road away from any security which may be placed in the path to illegally crossing the border?  Without security across the entire border, this part of the question is meaningless.

The bill does allocate $2 billion to the Department of Homeland Security. Now be mindful this is the same department where the Secretary of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano, has repeatedly stated our borders “have never been more secure.”  So in essence this $2 billion becomes a slush fund for Homeland Security.  Because according to her, we are good to go.

Blocking employers from hiring illegal immigrates can be accomplished by a small stand-alone bill which mandates e-verify.  E-verify is a United State sponsored computer program which

checks legal status against a federal data base and was created in 1997.  Mandate employers to utilize the system for all new hires with harsh fines against any company which is found to hire illegal workers.  We do NOT need a 1,000 plus page bill to accomplish this part of the purposed bill.

Criminality?  According to numerous sources waivers are built in to the system to allow criminals access to citizenship.  From the Washington Examiner:

 “What Rubio and other Gang members don’t say as often is that even if a background check discovers significant criminal activity in an immigrant’s past, exceptions and waivers written into the bill will allow the immigrant to still achieve legal status. On top of that, the bill gives Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano virtually unlimited power to ignore many criminal acts and grant legal status whenever she chooses.”

Clip then later in the article…

“But that is not the biggest exception in the bill. A few lines later, the legislation gives the Secretary of Homeland Security authority to ignore an immigrant’s record and grant legal status no matter how many misdemeanor convictions the immigrant might have. “The secretary may waive [the misdemeanor requirement] on behalf of an alien for humanitarian purposes, to ensure family unity, or if such a waiver is otherwise in the public interest,” the bill says. It is within Janet Napolitano’s discretion to decide what is in the public interest. Gang supporters might argue that all these provisions involve the least serious sort of crimes. But depending on jurisdiction, some cases of vehicular homicide, drunk driving, domestic violence, sex offenses, and theft are all categorized as misdemeanors.” (Emphasis added)

 Read the entire article at the link above.

A vast majority of the first question by Harper polling is misleading and not based on actual language of the law.

Question 2 in the poll:

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 before they can be eligible for citizenship?

So they are saying illegal aliens would have to pay a penalty, but the penalty comes to around $14/per month over a six year period for a total of $1,000, is that really a fine for breaking the law?  And if this was spelled out to the respondents of the Harper poll, would their answers change?

Learn English, well sort of.. they again dilute existing law,  section 312 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, which requires both a knowledge of English and US history. The Senate bill allows illegal immigrants to simply claim they are enrolled in a course to learn English rather than actually requiring them to know it.

Criminal background check while covered above, we suppose if it is said enough times people will believe it’s actually in the bill.  But as an additional side note from the  New York Post:

“The Homeland Security Department released from its jails more than 2,000 illegal immigrants facing deportation in recent weeks due to looming budget cuts and planned to release 3,000 more during March, The Associated Press has learned.”

 Homeland Security the same department which will have complete control over border security, if this legislation passes, is currently releasing illegal alien criminals.

But of course they will have to pay back taxes, that is if they ever legitimately worked under their own name and have a legitimate social security number.  But they do not possess a social security card in their own name those are only for American citizens, so the only way back taxes will be collected is if the IRS is already going after them on taxes.  Pages  68-69 says they only have to pay  ‘Federal income taxes assessed in accordance with section 6203 of the Internal Revenue Code,’ which is the section on assessments.  So for the most part forget it, plus if they have worked off the books or are using fraudulent Social Security cards, the Gang of 8 ignores the issue entirely.

The remaining questions in the poll, which you can read at the start of this post, deals with whether individuals would be more likely to vote for a Senator who supports the imaginary bill and demographics of the poll.  The one interesting and probably most factual piece of information is that of the 509 respondents of the poll.. 93% believed it at least somewhat important to fix the illegal immigration issue.

How much worth can be placed in a poll which misleads from the very first question?  And if the poll had stated what actually is in the bill instead of talking points, how many people would have voted as they did?  And why is The Times publishing a poll which is so obviously flawed?  By The Times heading for the article one would think IF you are not for the current Senate bill, you are on the wrong side of history.

Yes, Americans want the illegal immigration problem fixed but not with, massive fuzzy language bills which can only be described as another example of “train wreck” legislation.

Patriots the time to ACT is NOW!  Call your Senators and tell them NO, WE DEMAND SMALL BILLS WHICH ADDRESS THE PROBLEM.  Start with real border security and then next E-verify.

Later in the week, we will review the groups who paid for the polling and what dog they have in the race.


<<Jan 2018>>
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31 1 2 3 4