Posted on 05/12/2010 7:17:04 AM PDT by iowamark
Seventy percent (70%) of Massachusetts voters favor a proposal recently rejected by the state legislature that would stop illegal immigrants from receiving public benefits.
A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey shows that just 17% oppose the proposal to prevent illegal immigrants from gaining access to public housing, unemployment benefits, welfare or workers compensation. Thirteen percent (13%) more are not sure.
The proposal failed to pass in the Democratically-controlled State House last month by a 75 to 82 vote.
Fifty percent (50%) of voters in Massachusetts oppose a boycott of Arizona like the one just passed by Boston City Council to protest that state’s new law cracking down on illegal immigration. Thirty-four percent (34%) favor such a boycott, while another 16% are undecided.
But just 41% favor a law like Arizona’s that empowers local police to stop anyone they suspect of being an illegal immigrant. Forty-eight percent (48%) oppose such a law. Eleven percent (11%) are not sure.
Nationally, 58% support a law like the one recently adopted in Arizona.
The survey of 500 Likely Voters in Massachusetts was conducted on May 10, 2010 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 4.5 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC. See methodology.
Sixty-seven percent (67%) of Bay State voters are at least somewhat concerned that a law like Arizona’s might violate the civil rights of some U.S. citizens while 30% don’t share that concern. Those figures include 40% who are Very Concerned and 11% who are Not At All Concerned.
Fifty-eight percent (58%) favor a welcoming immigration policy that only excludes “national security threats, criminals and those who would come here to live off our welfare system.” Just 23% disagree with such a policy. This is comparable to findings among voters nationwide.
Governor Deval Patrick yesterday criticized the public benefits proposal and denounced the Arizona bill, saying he would veto a similar law if passed by the state legislature. However, he also said the state would not follow Boston’s example and divest state funds from Arizona as a protest.
His two chief opponents for governor, Republican Charlie Banker and Democrat-turned-independent Tim Cahill, both favor the legislation barring illegal immigrants from public benefits. Cahill has defended the Arizona law; Baker has not commented in detail on it.
Patrick now earns 45% of the vote in his bid for reelection to Baker’s 31% and Cahill’s 14%.
Republicans and voters not affiliated with either party overwhelmingly support the proposal that would stop illegal immigrants from getting public benefits, as do 53% of Democrats.
But 52% of Democratic voters favor a boycott of Arizona, while 74% of Republicans and 66% of unaffiliateds oppose it.
When it comes to having a law like Arizona’s, however, 64% of GOP voters are in favor of it, but 68%of Democrats are opposed. Among unaffiliated voters in Massachusetts, 46% favor such a law, while 39% oppose it.
Ridiculous! Why MA is a SANCTUARY state where all unwashed, disease ridden, criminal elements are warmly welcomed. Come amigos! Bring forth your scores of illegitimate births, your requests for free driver’s licenses, free hospitalization, free healthcare, free child services, free food stamps, free welfare payments, free unemployment cash, free college educations! Yes come my compadres! MA welcomes your tuberculosis, your STD’s, your mental retardation, your prison records! Come, and we will do the Hat dance to celebrate!
Our immigration law says they are to be deported.
On the contrary, the criminals should repent and do the right thing. They should go home voluntarily.
(I think we're witnessing the rise of the apostate churches. All they think about today is their collection plates. No wonder church attendance is way down.)
Who knew that 70% of Massholes are actually racists! /sarcasm
Which puts a twist into the whole poll. If the law is misstated, then people are only polled on the misstated law, not the law, then the poll results are quoted, further misstating the law while declaring people's opinion of the (misstated) law and not the actual thing.
The distortions just keep on coming.
I honestly believe the goal is to confuse or mislead the people as to just what the law says in the first place.
Wait until the MSM reports that 70% of the citizens of Mass are racist haters and out of touch with the mainstream.
More evidence that Democrats push an aggressive immigration package at their peril.
Never in my four decades of living have I seen the Governments so out of touch with the voters.... It’s like crazy ideologues calling shots no one understands.
A tiny state like Mass. has 157 house members??!!
The Massachusetts House had 240 members until 1978, now 160.
Sorry MA, you’ve made your bed. Lay in it.
Ping!
Does this mean illegal aliens are already receiving (legally) state benefits? That is insane.
You’ve heard of Aunt Zeituni, haven’t you?
We are talking about Massachusetts, where anybody can vote. Illegal does not mean non-voter in many places... and not just in Mass. Zero is allowing lots of Ethiopian and Sudanese into the country on Diversity Visas. Most are Muslim and most are told to vote Dimocrap, when able! They are told they will get more from their votes!
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.