A new Rasmussen Reports survey finds that 63% see the current immigration laws as a threat to national security. While that's nearly 2/3's of people, I'm a little disappointed. Obviously we are not doing a good enough job educating the other 1/3 who seemed to think that current immigration laws keep us nationally secure.
Who in their right mind would think streams of illegal aliens coming into our country and porous borders make us safe and secure? They are either ignorant to the issue or they are proponents of illegal aliens or terrorists.
Seventy-six percent (76%) of American voters say it is too easy for people from other countries to enter the United States. A Rasmussen Reports survey found that just 11% take the opposite view and believe it is too hard.
The survey also found that 63% believe that "current immigration laws" are a threat to national security. Just 20% disagree.
Sixty-two percent (62%) consider the laws a threat to the U.S. economy while 23% disagree.
There is no significant gender gap or racial divide on these questions.
Republicans (76%) are more likely than Democrats (57%) to see immigration laws as a national security threat. By a smaller margin, 67% to 61%, Republicans are also more likely to see immigration laws as an economic threat.
Discussing the number 63%, Digger says, "While that's greater than nearly 2/3's of people, I'm a little disappointed."
Greater than nearly 2/3 of the people? So, 62% is nearly 2/3, but 63% can only be described as being greater than nearly 2/3? I don't get it. 66% must be a number that's nearly less than 2/3 of 1 nearly greater than 2/3, or something like that...
Posted by: Will Mason on September 22, 2005 01:33 PM
Ooops, was typing furiously. Meant, "nearly" not "greater than nearly"
Does something about "poor, tired, huddled masses" ring a bell?
You should give the statue back if you don't believe in it anymore.
Posted by: Railroad Stone on September 22, 2005 11:18 PM
For some people, the threat of terrorism is not the only consideration in every single policy decision in this country... even if terrorism *was* the major consideration, how many Mexicans are terrorists? Allowing people over the border isn't the problem. Terrorists have generally been perfectly able to get here on legitimate visas, which they then overstay, or they use false papers which are already obviously illegal. They don't come over the Rio Grande with only the clothes on their backs to work for less than minimum wage sweeping restaurants or caring for other peoples' children. The terrorists generally have the funding for real or passably fake documentation, and that's why they're dangerous. Tighter border restrictions will not prevent these people from entering the country, just those who're trying to find a better life.
Posted by: Susan on September 23, 2005 08:09 AM
While I think immigration policy needs to be reviewed and updated, I'm not entirely sure that the existing scheme is a national security problem. I think you're mixing up issues - illegal immigration is and enforcement problem not a policy problem.
I've no problem with the "poor, tired, huddled masses" seeking to enter our fair country LEAGALLY or if they can prove persecution at home. It's the border jumpers coming only for the $$ and without the incentive to improve their own situation back home (except for that $$) that bug the hell out of me.
What part of ILLEGAL do you not understand?