Poll Shows Most in U.S. Want Overhaul of Immigration Laws
By RANDAL C. ARCHIBOLD and MEGAN THEE-BRENAN
Published: May 3, 2010
LOS ANGELES — The overwhelming majority of Americans think that the country’s immigration policies need to be seriously overhauled. And despite protests against Arizona’s stringent new immigration enforcement law, a slim majority of Americans support it, even though they say it may lead to racial profiling.
These are the findings of the latest New York Times/CBS News poll.
With the signing of the Arizona on April 23 and reports of renewed efforts in Washington to rethink immigration, there has been an uptick in the number of Americans who describe illegal immigration as a serious problem.
But the poll — conducted April 28 through May 2 with 1,079 adults, and with a margin of sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points for all adults — suggests Americans remain deeply conflicted about what to do.
The public broadly agrees, across party lines, that the United States could be doing more along its border to keep illegal immigrants out: 78 percent of respondents.
That unity, however, fractures on the question of what to do with illegal immigrants already here and the role of states in enforcing immigration law, normally a federal responsibility.
A majority of Americans, 57 percent, say the federal government should determine laws addressing illegal immigration. But 51 percent said the Arizona law is about right in tackling the problem, though 36 percent said it goes too far and 9 percent said it didn’t go far enough in tackling the problem.
The law has recharged the national debate over securing the border and what to do about the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants already in the country.
The Arizona law gives local police broad power to detain and check the legal status of people they suspect are in the country illegally. Lawsuits have already been filed on several grounds, including that it will lead to racial profiling of legal residents and that the state has unconstitutionally intruded on federal authority.
Under a torrent of criticism, the Arizona legislature and governor made changes to the law Friday that they say explicitly bar the police from racial profiling and allow officers to inquire about immigration status only of people they stop, detain or arrest in enforcing existing state law. But it also now includes civil violations of municipal codes as grounds to check papers and opponents were not mollified by the changes.
In follow-up interviews, poll respondents who embraced the thrust of the Arizona law still called for a national solution.
“The Arizona law is fine, but the federal government has to step in and come up with something and they’re not doing it,” said Pat Turkos, 64, a library worker and Republican from Baltimore.
She added, “I don’t think they should be stopped just walking down the street, only if they’re stopped for speeding for example. I believe everybody has the right to come here, but I think they have to be made legal citizens.”
Although the public broadly agrees that the Arizona law will result in racial profiling, overburden local and state law enforcement agencies, and decrease illegal immigrants’ willingness to report crimes for fear of deportation, large majorities nonetheless think it will reduce the number of illegal immigrants in the state, will deter illegal border crossings and, to a lesser extent, will reduce crime.
Some attitudes about immigration have remained stable among the public. Nearly nine in ten of those surveyed agree that immigration policy in the country needs to be seriously reworked, and about eight in ten think the United States should be doing more to secure its borders.
Most still say illegal immigrants weaken the nation’s economy rather than strengthen it, and public opinion remains divided over how the United States should handle illegal immigrants currently in the country.
But American attitudes toward the law and whether illegal immigrants already here should have a path to citizenship differed markedly across regions and parties.
Westerners and Northeasterners, for example, are significantly more likely than those in all other regions to say the recent law in Arizona goes too far.
And Democrats are much more likely than Republicans or independents to support a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants currently working in the country.
Just 8 percent of Americans said the immigration system needs only minor changes. The vast majority say it needs reworking, including 44 percent who believe it needs to be completely rebuilt, and 45 percent who say it needs fundamental changes
Three quarters think that overall illegal immigrants are drain on the economy because they do not all pay taxes but use public services such as hospitals and schools; nearly two in 10 believe they strengthen the economy by providing low-cost labor and purchasing goods and services, a chief argument among many of their advocates.
“I do think the federal government should deal with it because illegal immigrants don’t pay taxes and don’t contribute to our government,” Deborah Adams, 53, a Democrat from Ephrata, Pa and a paramedic who called the Arizona law a “necessary evil.”
“They take jobs from American citizens who need to work and pay into social security,” she added.
Immigration rallies in several cities on Saturday pressed the case for sweeping changes in immigration law to better control the flow of people without papers into the United States.
So far no bill has been introduced in Congress and President Obama, while supportive of the idea of immigration reform, has said he questions whether lawmakers have the appetite for a divisive battle over it after a year of other political battles and heading into mid-term Congressional elections.
A delegation of Arizonans opposed to the law, including Mayor Phil Gordon of Phoenix, plans to meet with Justice Department officials Tuesday to urge them to step into the brewing legal battle over the law.
One of the law’s staunchest advocates, Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County in the Phoenix metropolitan area, announced Monday that after toying with the idea, as he has done over the years like a spring ritual, he will not run for governor.
nytimes.com |
