New Poll Shows Obama's DREAM Policy a Hit with the General Public as Well

Yesterday I reported on new polling showing Latino voters are excited and overwhelmingly supportive of the new immigration policy announced by the White House. And now a new Bloomberg poll shows that the public backs the plan by a 64 to 35 point margin. And 65% of independents like the plan. Not surprisingly, the Republicans are suddenly flailing in their attempts to react other than in their usual reflexive anti-immigration way.

Comments

[Limbo]

The Bloomberg way oversampled Democrats. I wouldn't base too much on it.

[Legal and no longer waiting]

Jack, no you asked when the decision to deport will be made if the applicant made a violation after the status was approved.

I favor case by case analysis, and I believe in second chances for young people.

[Jack]

"Jack, so your only gripe is how soon you can strip a young person of this non-status as send them back if they make a mistake?"

Actually, I was just wondering about details which I have not seen addressed. But yes, I would favor loss of the deferred action status if the recipient does something which would have disqualified him from that status or if it were discovered after approval that they were not, in fact, eligible but approved anyway. Don't you?

[George Chell in Singapore]

The poll may be a bit of an outlier considering the fact that it shows Obama up by 13 nationally. However, it can be safely said that the public does support the stance by a much narrower margin. Meanwhile, look for Gallup and Rasmussen to throw water on this poll pretty soon.

[gg]

It is because of paranoid characters like Jack that we have a complex immigration system that is so difficult to enforce. While the DREAM order though not a permanent solution is better than nothing,in my view can serve as a framework for any future immigration reform. By allowing legal status which is not anywhere close to "amnesty" and not providing a path to citizenship it can be the best compromise in the current circumstances.

[Another Voice]

Jack that is why is called discretion and is done on a case by case basis , this is not to done to calm hater like you. Is to be practical while along term solution is found through legislation whiuch we have been waiting for .....I don't know 25 years maybe?? So all the little rules would come at that time right now this is a temporary meassure from the executive branch. I hope you and your folks eat it up and get some indigestion until they are blue!!!!

[Legal and no longer waiting]

Jack, so your only gripe is how soon you can strip a young person of this non-status as send them back if they make a mistake? You were obviously a perfect teenager who never made a single mistake, never skipped school, never smoked pot, never played with your father's gun, and so on.

Thebottom line is that the people of this country are not with you. They don't want any hardline nonsense.

[Jack]

Some issues I have not heard details on (if they even exist):

1) What happens if AFTER approval of a deferred action the recipient commits any of the acts which would have disqualified his application? E.g., commits a felony, drops out of school, etc. Still good for two years? Subject to revocation? Automatic revocation?

2) Under the current enforcement priority and "prosecutorial discretion" guidelines, one of the "relevant factors" not to enforce the law is:

"whether the person has a U.S. citizen or permanent resident spouse, child, or parent"

Will under 30 deferred action recipient be added to that factor? Will unlawfully present relatives of deferred action recipients be looked at differently?

[Jack]

“Our nation’s immigration laws must be enforced in a firm and sensible manner,” said Secretary Napolitano. “But they are not designed to be blindly enforced without consideration given to the individual circumstances of each case."

What? They are not considering individual circumstances of each case:

“Here the administration is implementing a categorical policy not to enforce federal law, which dictates deportation for illegal [immigrants] regardless of their age. Congress has refused to pass such laws and this is an obvious effort to circumvent Congress – something of a signature for this administration." -- Jonathan Turley

What if a broad amnesty were passed as law by Congress and then the president arbitrarily carved out this very same under 30 category as being the only people whose applications would be accepted using the very same limited resources and discretion excuses? All the same assertions of presidential power in this case could be used in that case.

[Sa]

"Grassley made these points on Friday already, that was in the first reactions in the press."

How the administration is going to pay for these free EADS and deferred action applications. Can they charge fees without congress authorization?

[gg]

Court challenges coming on dream act proposal ? Not constitutional ... ??

http://video.foxnews.com/v/1695961608001/president-obama-illegal-immigration-and-the-law/?playlist_id=86934

[JoeF]

Grassley made these points on Friday already, that was in the first reactions in the press.
There is a reason why Romney and others are pretty quiet: they need to win an election. Grassley doesn't (his term goes until 2016.)

[gg]

Grassley letter questions president on deferred action for dream kids. letter below

http://www.grassley.senate.gov/about/upload/061920123.pdf