Image 01 Image 03

Voters Favor Deportation, Tougher Penalties More Than Government Does

Voters Favor Deportation, Tougher Penalties More Than Government Does

Close the border

With illegal immigration and sanctuary cities a topic of hot debate, it’s interesting to note that voters think the federal government doesn’t do enough to deport illegal aliens.  Rasmussen reports:

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 60% of Likely U.S. Voters think the U.S. government is not aggressive enough in deporting those who are in this country illegally. That shows little change from April but is up from 52% in April of last year. Twelve percent (12%) think the government is too aggressive, down from 16% in April. Sixteen percent (16%) now think the number of deportations is about right, while 12% are not sure.

This is a trend that seems to be growing, as voters shift toward stronger penalties for hiring / housing illegals and harsher punishments for sanctuary cities:

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 55% of Likely U.S. Voters think the policies and practices of the federal government encourage people to enter the United States illegally, down just two points from March’s recent high. Twenty-eight percent (28%) disagree, while 17% are undecided.

Sixty-two percent (62%) of Likely U.S. Voters think the U.S. Justice Department should take legal action against cities that provide sanctuary for illegal immigrants. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just 26% oppose Justice Department action against sanctuary cities. Twelve percent (12%) are undecided.

While voters are becoming increasingly supportive of stronger measures against illegal immigration, the Department of Homeland Security is reporting a “surge” in illegal immigrants, the International Business Times reports:

Federal border officials might have spoken too soon when they predicted earlier this year that the level of illegal immigration to the U.S. among mothers and children would decrease. There was actually a surge of immigrant families crossing U.S. borders last month, a top Department of Homeland Security official told a federal court Thursday.

The new wave of arrivals comes as Border Patrol officials continue to wrestle with conditions at detention facilities overcrowded with Central American children and adults fleeing their homelands for the U.S. During the court hearing Thursday, Obama administration officials were seeking a compromise from a federal judge who recently limited how officials detain immigrant families.

Our porous southern border is a real problem not only in terms of national security but also because resources are stretched so thin that the immigrants who cross the border illegally are confronted with less than ideal living conditions in over-extended detention facilities.  The answer is not to throw more money at this ever-growing problem but to close the border; something the majority of Americans support.

It’s a solution that France and the UK urge the EU to take and that Switzerland is threatening, while Hungary is busy building a fence at their border and Italy is increasing their border protection, and we all know how much progressives like to point to Europe as an example we should follow.  For once, I agree.

[Featured Image: Obama Immigration Executive Action Speech End]


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


The American public’s attitude towards illegal aliens would be even tougher if Americans knew the crime statistics that the media work so hard to keep from them.

For example, did you know that illegal aliens were 40% of Florida’s total murder convictions from 2008 – 2014?

And did you know that the federal crime statistics show that illegal aliens are significantly over-represented in every category of federal criminal convictions?

The media, working hand-in-hand with Big Business and Big Government, continually push the myth that illegal aliens are more law-abiding than U.S. citizens, but that is a blatant lie, the purpose of which is to keep the American public from becoming enraged about what is really happening in our country.

    Ragspierre in reply to Observer. | August 9, 2015 at 3:46 pm

    Additionally, even if every immigrant into the US was blond-haired, blue-eyed sweet Heidi and her kindly old goat-herd grandfather, NO country on earth can exist without controlling who comes into it, and under what circumstances.

    In many respects, the US is unique; there isn’t a first-world nation I can think of off the top of my bald head that is cheek-by-jowl with a third-world nation like Mexico.

    So, we HAVE to make coming here illegally and working or staying and drawing ANY kind of benefits legally impossible.

    AND we have to EITHER control people who come here legally OR we need to cut that influx off if we find we simply can’t for as long as it takes to get THAT problem under control, too.

    Bottom line: no legal status, no work. No legal status, no government benefits.

    Sammy Finkelman in reply to Observer. | August 9, 2015 at 4:53 pm

    And did you know that the federal crime statistics show that illegal aliens are significantly over-represented in every category of federal criminal convictions?

    More poppycock from the union. Statistics show the opposite.

    Newcomers to the U.S. are less likely than the native population to commit violent crimes or be incarcerated.

    Among men age 18-39 (who comprise the vast majority of the prison population), the 3.5 percent incarceration rate of the native-born in 2000 was 5 times higher than the 0.7 percent incarceration rate of the foreign-born.

    The foreign-born incarceration rate in 2000 was nearly two-and-a-half times less than the 1.7 percent rate for native-born non-Hispanic white men and almost 17 times less than the 11.6 percent rate for native-born black men.

    Native-born Hispanic men were nearly 7 times more likely to be in prison than foreign-born Hispanic men in 2000, while the incarceration rate of native-born non-Hispanic white men was almost 3 times higher than that of foreign-born white men.

    Foreign-born Mexicans had an incarceration rate of only 0.7 percent in 2000—more than 8 times lower than the 5.9 percent rate of native-born males of Mexican descent. Foreign-born Salvadoran and Guatemalan men had an incarceration rate of 0.5 percent, compared to 3.0 percent of native-born males of Salvadoran and Guatemalan descent.

    Immigrants are convicted of crimes at rates significantly lower than native-born American citizens, and this has been true for decades. A recent report from the American Immigration Council found that about 1.6% of immigrant men between the ages of 18 and 39 were incarcerated, compared with 3.3% of native-born American citizens in the same age range. Among men in that age range without a high-school diploma, the incarceration rate for Mexican immigrants is less than one-third of that of native-born American citizens.

      Midwest Rhino in reply to Sammy Finkelman. | August 9, 2015 at 5:41 pm

      Your stats are for LEGAL immigrants, who spent a lot of time and money getting here, and are of course higher educated and well behaved. Didn’t we already have a thread here debunking that junk?

      We are stuck with the lowlife Americans, we sure don’t need to import more, nor to allow invaders the rights our citizens have.

      Observer in reply to Sammy Finkelman. | August 9, 2015 at 6:17 pm

      The federal government’s own crime statistics prove otherwise, as do the crime statistics of every state.

      But keep citing the Wall Street Journal. They’ve never had an amnesty agenda, right? You may as well cite the New York Times, or Carlos Slim himself.

One of the talking points the amnesty crowds pushes is the anchor baby situation, where illegals cross the border in time to deliver a baby who is automatically a citizen. Then, when you talk about deporting the parents, they cry about breaking up families. Simple solution: your baby does not automatically receive citizenship status unless you were here legally. It would be one small step toward common sense, but it would be one step closer.

    Valerie in reply to windbag. | August 10, 2015 at 12:00 am

    People who are here illegally have not submitted to our laws. That is the basis for denying citizenship to their children.

      Milhouse in reply to Valerie. | August 10, 2015 at 2:11 am

      That’s not what the constitution says. The constitution says subject to the jurisdiction. Diplomats are not subject to US jurisdiction; that means they can commit any crime and all we can do is deport them. Their children born in the USA are not citizens. Illegal aliens are subject to U jursidiction; that is why when they are caught committing crimes they are arrested, tried, and punished. Therefore their US-born children are citizens. There is no way around this unless you can get a constitutional amendment passed.

C’mon folks! Do you REALLY think the Fed’ral Gubmint CARES what we think? The Ruling Class has no more interest in curbing illegal immigration than the Face on Mars.

The key to getting illegals out of the country is to first get rid of the Crony Capitalists, Power Brokers and assorted criminals in Washington, D.C. Second is to elect responsible, Thinking Adults who love this country and the ideals fostered by the Founders.

I’d go so far as to prohibit ICE from rescuing illegals from the desert. They came here illegally, they took their chances.

    Midwest Rhino in reply to SeniorD. | August 9, 2015 at 6:01 pm

    55 million died fighting WW2 over freedom of the individual and their sovereignty, but now the commie in the White House demands we must take care of any third worlder that wants to come rob that for which “we” fought.

    We have to treat it as an invasion. For under $14 I bought the kindle and audible version of Coulter’s “Adios America”. It really reveals the evil efforts of the left to replace true blue Americans with a third world welfare class. Reversing the replacement of our American Way is perhaps the most essential plank for 2016.

    If we recognized the damage being done, and the criminal elements that are freely entering, we’d use more than bean bags to stop the invaders. But Obama covertly buses them hither and yon, and demands no one question if they are citizens.

    Any that would listen to her book would recognize how malicious/seditious our open borders rulers really are, if they had any doubt.

CausticConservative | August 9, 2015 at 3:57 pm

The problem is bad, but not bad enough yet that politicians will overcome the inertia of doing nothing. Cries of “amnesty!” have shut down potentially effective reforms in the past.

Next president is going to have to get it done piece by piece and expend political capital to do it. Seems like a long shot…

“Per the FBI, there were 67,642 murders in the U.S. from 2005 through 2008, and 115,717 from 2003 through 2009. Per the GAO, criminal aliens committed 25,064 of them. That means they committed 22% to 37% of all murders in the U.S., while being only 3.52% to 8.25% of the population.”

Notice that the above murder statistics only go up to 2008. In other words, even before Obama took office in 2009 and invited millions of new illegal aliens into the U.S., illegal aliens were already committing up to 37% of all the murders in the U.S. And the numbers have only gotten worse since 2009, which is why the Obama administration does everything possible to prevent statistics about illegal alien crimes from getting to the public.

Sammy Finkelman | August 9, 2015 at 4:41 pm

Federal border officials might have spoken too soon when they predicted earlier this year that the level of illegal immigration to the U.S. among mothers and children would decrease.

Well, of course.

Initially, Homeland Security officials said they were detaining the families to send a message to others in Central America to deter them from coming to the United States illegally. In February, a federal court in Washington, D.C., ruled that strategy unconstitutional. Officials stopped invoking deterrence as a factor in deciding whether to release mothers and children as they seek asylum in the United States….

…“I think this spells the beginning of the end for the Obama administration’s immigrant family detention policy,” Mr. Schey, the president of the human rights center, said Friday. “A policy that just targets mothers with children is not rational and it’s inhumane.”

Now there’s a court order not to keep people in prison for the purpose of deterrence, and minors must be released, and their best custodian is the mother, so the mother must be released with the child, and the last I heard (last year) court dates for asylum or hardship deferrals were being set for the day after Thanksgiving, 2019.

Everyone now gets the same unrealistic court date – otherwise it would go into the 2020s.

The deportation process has completely broken down, except for voluntary departures, cases assigned high priority, people who actually didn’t enter the United States, and people with deportation orders already pending.

Sammy Finkelman | August 9, 2015 at 4:42 pm

Any attempt to spend more money on deportations will be filibustered in the Senate.

    Not going to spend any more money on deportations, Sammy. Matter of fact, we’ll be spending LESS money on several things:

    1. We’re not going to spend any money suing states that want to pass laws saying no one has to do business with those who can’t prove their here legally.

    2. We’re going to save a lot of money by withholding ANY federal funds from “sanctuary jurisdictions”.

    3. For enforcement of voter ID by the states, see #1.

    4. For withholding any state or federal benefits from those who can’t prove they’re here legally, see #1 and #2.

    And those just scratch the surface.

      Milhouse in reply to SDN. | August 10, 2015 at 2:17 am

      Sammy didn’t say spend more money, he said spend money. Even one deportation costs money, and that money has to be voted by Congress, and will have to overcome first a filibuster and then a veto. All of the measures you list will have to face the same barrier. How do you plan to overcome it?

Midwest Rhino | August 9, 2015 at 6:47 pm

So five times as many said the government is not aggressive enough at DEPORTING. But deporting sounds mean, so asking if they support coming here illegally might get 95% saying “NO”. Except Jeb, who just said they have no other choice, and it’s an act of love.

Same with “should the DOJ take legal action against SANCTUARY cities”. Well sanctuary for unfortunates sounds nice. “Should sanctuary cities be allowed to safe harbor illegals that have committed crimes, as happened with the one that murdered Kate, and countless others?” That might get 98% saying “NO”?

They do the same with “comprehensive reform”. Almost everyone wants the border closed, but if they also ask about “comprehensive reform”, some say sure, they want that too. But Obama counts “comprehensive reform” (a meaningless term if not defined) as amnesty, in place of a closed border, saying that is what people really want.

Rasmussen also asked about the anchor baby thing in their five questions, but I couldn’t find the results. I guess that is for those that pay.

Not A Member of Any Organized Political | August 10, 2015 at 3:37 pm

The Deportations can start in the White House and the Houses of Congress…..