Poll: Wealthy, liberals unite to support increased immigration

A new poll shows that the wealthy and politically well-connected favor the sharp immigration increases that are included in pending House and Senate bills.

The immigration increases are opposed by the majority of lower-income and middle-income voters, and by political moderates and conservatives, according to the new Rasmussen poll of 1,000 likely voters. A plurality of African-Americans oppose the increases.

“The idea of importing millions of additional people to compete with American workers in the middle class is politically absurd,” said Mark Krikorian, director of the Center for Immigration Studies. Voters “aren’t stupid and they understand what the [immigration] proposals are designed to do,” he told The Daily Caller.

The stark class divide on immigration was highlighted by Rasmussen as House leaders, including Speaker John Boehner and Rep. Paul Ryan, prepare to push GOP legislators to back a package of far-reaching immigration bills.

They’ll use the Jan. 29-31 retreat in Cambridge, Md., to tout bills that would dramatically boost foreign competition for the blue-collar jobs sought by American voters, teenagers, graduates and unemployed.

In June, the Senate passed a bill that would triple the inflow of legal immigrants over the next decade.

The opposition to the bill is being led by reform groups, such as tea party groups, NumbersUSA and the Madison Project.

“We will not grow the party and win back Reagan Democrats by pushing the agenda of the corporate interests,” said Daniel Horowitz, policy director at the Madison Project. “Republican business interests are asking for a de facto maximum wage mandate with an unnatural and constant flow of cheap foreign labor.”

Chamber of Commerce also wants SS and Medicare min age raised to ~ 70,

That idea is particularly irksome. Always proposed by high paid people who spent their whole career behind a desk. Try telling a carpenter or a waitress who've worked all their lives that they can't retire at 65, got to wait another 5 years. What would happen is people will retire and collect SSDI instead of regular SocSec. In fact, I'm convinced a lot of the increase in SSDI now is baby boomers who can't do physical jobs anymore.

RE :”That idea is particularly irksome. Always proposed by high paid people who spent their whole career behind a desk. Try telling a carpenter or a waitress who've worked all their lives that they can't retire at 65, got to wait another 5 years. What would happen is people will retire and collect SSDI instead of regular SocSec. “

I have made that exact point myself.

I went to a Hair Cuttery recently and the one who cuts it is a mom ~ 40s with three kids, originally from Korea. I asked her if she signed up for O Malley care and she told me she has no health insurance.

I try to imagine her trying to stand and cut hair all day when she is 67. Yep, SSI.

The thing that was obscene about Ryan's scam plan, which few bought, was he exempts everyone born after a certain year, zero cuts for 10 years, giving the full benefits to that group for the rest of their lives,
and everyone born after that date who get to pay for it he says “Sorry, you are out of luck. There will be no more $$$ left for yours. But we will give you a discount coupon instead. WE are brave for telling you the TRUTH”

No way would people buy such BS, it was just stupid, but we were told that it was genius.

My original point was that the Chamber (and Ryan I guess) demanding amnesty and more menial workers, and eventually giving them the vote,
doesn't work with their demands of raising the effective retirement age for entitlements.

Clearly these fools must know that they will eventually be voting to put more costly mandates and taxes on them.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.