As congressional and White House negotiators seek a deal on immigration, a survey in California suggests Democrats may have cover on their left flank as they acquiesce on tougher border enforcement.
By more than 2-to-1, California voters do not feel that U.S. borders are secure in preventing people from entering the country illegally, according to a poll released last week by the Institute of Governmental Studies at UC Berkeley.
Democratic voters are evenly split on whether the border is secure enough, which itself is interesting in a deep blue California that considers itself a “sanctuary state” to protect undocumented immigrants.
According to the Berkeley IGS poll, Republicans, voters with no party preference and of other parties overwhelmingly agree the border is not secure. Attracting independents and crossover voters is critical for both Democrats and Republicans in swing districts. Immigration remains a major political flash point across the nation.
Among all ed voters surveyed, 62 percent say the borders are not secure enough, compared with 30 percent who say they are. The “not secure” figure grows to 65 percent among likely voters.
Among a breakdown of more than 20 subsets of voters, the only ones where a majority believe the border is secure identify themselves as “strongly liberal.” Besides Democrats, at least a plurality of all other categories of voters say the border is not secure.
The White House and Democratic congressional leaders have been criticized from progressive politicians and groups for moving to agree to a tougher border policy. But the poll, conducted Jan. 4-8, suggests they may have less to fear about political repercussions, with broader public for more border enforcement. National polls suggest even stronger backing for tougher border policies.
The Biden istration and a bipartisan group of senators say they are closing in on an agreement to enact significant limits on asylum, broaden expulsion authority and increase border security personnel and funding, among other things.
However, a Republican push to tighten presidential immigration parole policy has been a sticking point, according to various news reports.
For decades, presidents have used what is known as humanitarian parole that was designed to allow migrants into the U.S. under special circumstances, such as emergencies or fleeing conflicts in their home countries.
Republicans contend President Joe Biden has abused those powers. The istration this week said more than 1 million people have been allowed into the country under the parole program since Biden took office in January 2021.
The border-immigration deal is tied to foreign military aid, including to Ukraine — a top Biden priority.
Negotiators are working to resolve their differences and some sounded optimistic that there could be a vote in the Senate this week, but approval is not certain.
Meanwhile, Republicans in the House have shown virtually no for the emerging compromise, with several already saying they will block the proposal. Some pledge to do so on policy grounds, claiming that even though the plan is heavily weighted with Republican priorities, they should hold out for more.
Others are openly suggesting their stance is election-year maneuvering.
“I’m not willing to do too damn much right now to help a Democrat and to help Joe Biden’s approval rating,” Rep. Troy E. Nehls, R-Texas, told CNN earlier this month.
The loudest criticism of such positioning seemed to come not from Democrats, but Senate Republicans.
Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., said it would be “immoral” to reject a deal for partisan reasons, according to NBC.
“You don’t knowingly make this country less safe for political points,” he said.
GOP senators say the proposals are as close to a Republican wishlist on border enforcement as they’ll ever get. More than one Republican senator said such a deal won’t happen even if Donald Trump is elected president and the GOP has majorities in the House and the Senate.
“There’s absolutely no way that we would get the kind of border policy that’s been talked about right now with a Republican majority in the Senate, unless we get a 60-vote majority, which isn’t going to happen. . . there aren’t many Democrats that are going to be available,” Senate Minority Whip John Thune, R-S.D., said, adding, “This is a unique moment in time.”
Trump has increased pressure on Republicans to oppose the border package.
The proposal is lacking some key Democratic priorities found in past comprehensive immigration legislation. Those include a pathway to citizenship and making permanent the temporary program known as DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrival), which gives legal standing to certain migrants who have been in the U.S. since they were young.
That enough congressional Democrats are willing to abandon such goals for now underscores how the political dynamics on immigration are working against them. Many Democratic big-city mayors are pushing for action, and they aren’t alone.
Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., had a blunt take on CNN.
“I honestly don’t understand why it’s controversial to say we need a secure border,” he said. “. . . I think two things can be true at the same time. You can be very ive of immigration, but we also need to have a secure border. . . . We want to provide the American dream for any migrant. But it seems very difficult when you have 300,000 people (in a month) showing up encountered at our border to do that.”
The Berkeley IGS poll surveyed California voters on other immigration-related views and components of the package being negotiated in the Senate.
Four in 10 voters consider unauthorized immigrants coming across the border a major burden to the nation, compared with 30 percent who view the burden as minor. Just 22 percent don’t believe the migrants are a burden.
There was no clear consensus in the poll about asylum laws that apply to immigrants attempting to enter the U.S. because of persecution in their home countries. Thirty-six percent considered the asylum system too lenient, another 23 percent said it was about right, and 22 percent said the laws were too restrictive.
Voters were about evenly split on whether ing more restrictive asylum laws would stem the tide of asylum seekers coming to the U.S.
