RASMUSSEN REPORT: 67% OF AMERICAN PEOPLE SAY ILLEGALS STRAIN

MEXICANOCCUPATION.blogspot.com

*
DATE: MARCH 21, LA RAZA “THE RACE” ILLEGALS WILL MARCH ON D.C. DEMANDING WHAT OBAMA AND THE LA RAZA DEMS ARE ALREADY PREPARING… AMNESTY AND THE EVER GREATER EXPANSION OF THE MEXICAN WELFARE SYSTEM!..... ALONG WITH YOUR JOB!


*

While 67% of the American people say illegal immigrants are a strain on the U.S. Budget, I would wonder if that already significant number would go up dramatically if the American people knew the facts? Washington, long hispandering to La Raza, has continued to propagandize “amnesty” for 12 million illegals. Facts from non-government sources put the number at 38 million and breeding (at your expense) fast!

There is not a community in this nation that has not suffered from the OPEN BORDERS – NON-ENFORCEMENT OF LAWS, MEXICAN CRIME TIDAL WAVES, MEXICAN GANGS, AND MEXICAN MELTDOWN OF OUR “FREE” HOSPITALS. THE MEXICAN WELFARE STATE IS EXPANDING ALL OVER THE COUNTRY. IN “SANCTUARY CITY” LOS ANGELES (COUNTY), WELFARE TO ILLEGALS IS NEARLY $50 MILLION PER MONTH. YES, THAT’S MONTH, NOT YEAR! IN HARRY REID’S STATE OF NEVADA, 25% OF THE POPULATION IS ILLEGAL NOW, AND WELFARE COSTS FOR ILLEGALS IS ALSO SOARING!

YOU WILL NOT HEAR THE POLITICIANS TALK ABOUT THE STAGGERING COST OF ALL THIS “CHEAP” MEXICAN LABOR THEY’VE ALLOWED MEXICO TO EXPORT. IT’S ALL ABOUT KEEP WAGES DEPRESSED FOR THEIR WALL STREET CORPORATE PAYMASTERS.

THERE IS A REASON WHY MOST OF THE FORTUNE 500 ARE GENEROUS DONORS TO LA RAZA, THE FASCIST POLITICAL PARTY FOR “THE RACE”!

RASMUSSEN REPORT & FAIRUS.org

67% Say Illegal Immigrants Are Major Strain on U.S. Budget
Wednesday, March 03, 2010
As the country wrestles with a future of historic-level deficits, 67% of U.S. voters say that illegal immigrants are a significant strain on the U.S. budget.
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just 23% disagree and do not believe illegal immigration is a strain on the budget.
Two-out-of-three (66%) voters say the availability of government money and services draw illegal immigrants to the United States. Nineteen percent (19%) think otherwise and do not believe government money and services are a magnet for illegal immigration. Another 15% are not sure.
These findings help to explain why 68% say gaining control of the border is more important than legalizing the status of undocumented workers already living in the United States. Twenty-six percent (26%) think legalizing illegal immigrants is more important.
The majority support for controlling the borders has been consistent through several years of surveying.
(Want a free daily e-mail update? If it's in the news, it's in our polls). Rasmussen Reports updates are also available on Twitter or Facebook.
Budget documents provided by the Obama administration show that in Fiscal Year 2009 50% of all federal spending went to national defense, Social Security and Medicare. A recent Rasmussen Reports survey shows that only 35% of voters believe that the majority of federal spending goes to just defense, Social Security and Medicare.
Just 20% say Congress is at least somewhat likely over the next year to pass legislation to gain control of the border and reduce illegal immigration, with a mere four percent (4%) who think it’s very likely. Seventy-one percent (71%) see congressional action this year to control the border as unlikely, with 47% who say it’s not very likely and 24% who say it’s not at all likely.
On the other hand, 45% believe it’s at least somewhat likely that Congress in the next year will pass legislation to create a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants. This finding includes 10% who say it’s very likely.
Forty-seven percent (47%) think it’s unlikely that Congress will approve legislation in the next year that makes it possible for those who are here illegally to become U.S. citizens. Of that number, nine percent (9%) say it’s not at all likely.
This belief that Congress is more likely not to do what the majority of voters favor illustrates why unhappiness with Congress has reached the highest level ever recorded by Rasmussen Reports. Seventy-one percent (71%) of voters now say Congress is doing a poor job, and 63% say it would be better for the country if most congressional incumbents were defeated this November.
Fifty-six percent (56%) say the policies and practices of the federal government encourage people to enter the United States illegally. Twenty-seven percent (27%) disagree, and 17% are not sure.
Seventy-five percent (75%) of voters are angry at the government’s current policies, up nine points since September.
A majority of voters across virtually all demographic categories agree that illegal immigrants are a strain on the budget and that they are drawn to America by the availability of government money and services. But there are partisan differences.
Eighty-three percent (83%) of Republicans and 73% of voters not affiliated with either major party say illegal immigrants are a budget strain. Just 48% of Democrats agree, and nearly as many (40%) disagree.
Similarly, 77% of Republicans and 71% of unaffiliated voters see the availability of government money and services as drawing illegal immigrants to America. But only 50% of Democrats share that view.
The differences between the Political Class and Mainstream voters are even sharper. While 78% of Mainstream voters say illegal immigrants are a significant strain on the budget, 60% of the Political Class disagree.
Seventy-five percent (75%) of Mainstream voters think the availability of government money and services draws illegal immigrants to the United States. Fifty-three percent (53%) of the Political Class reject that view.
But then 59% of the Political Class say legalizing the status of undocumented workers already living in the Untied States is more important than gaining control of the border. Seventy-six percent (76%) of Mainstream voters put controlling the border first.
The majority of Republicans, Democrats and unaffiliateds believe control of the border is more important, but that view is more strongly held by GOP and unaffiliated voters.
Eighty percent (80%) of voters rate the issue of immigration as at least somewhat important in determining how they will vote in the next congressional election. That includes 50% who say it is very important to them.
Last summer, as California lawmakers struggled to close a $24-billion budget deficit, 64% of voters in the state said illegal immigrants put a significant strain on the state budget.
Please sign up for the Rasmussen Reports daily e-mail update (it’s free) or follow us on Twitter or Facebook. Let us keep you up to date with the latest public opinion news.
See survey questions and toplines. Crosstabs are available to Premium Members only

*
SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE
VOTERS INCREASINGLY PESSIMISTIC - IMMIGRATION TOPS ISSUES
(11-02) 04:00 PDT Sacramento
California voters are becoming increasingly pessimistic, with immigration issues topping their worries, according to a new Field Poll released Friday.
In a survey in the spring, half of voters interviewed statewide said that California was among the best places in the world to live, with 52 percent saying the Golden State was also moving in the right direction.
But now, burdened by a sputtering economy and doubts about the ability of elected officials to deal with mounting problems, voters' outlook is split - 42 percent of them said the state is headed in the right direction, while 42 percent gave a negative view and 16 percent were undecided.
And immigration and border protection questions have jumped back into the forefront of voter issues.
Two years ago, the last time the poll asked an open-ended question about voter concerns, just 6 percent of those interviewed identified immigration as their top concern.
In the new poll, 21 percent of voters named immigration and border control as their top concern - well ahead of public schools (13 percent) and the economy (9 percent).
"There's a lot of reasons, but when we see concerns about the economy, we usually see a spike on immigration, too," said Jaime Regalado, director of the Pat Brown Institute of Public Affairs at California State University Los Angeles. "It's a pocketbook issue - but it's an issue that has just not gone away."
The poll, conducted during the 10-day period ending Oct. 21, was drawn from random telephone interviews with 579 registered voters. It had a sampling error of plus or minus 3.7 percentage points.
Mark DiCamillo, director of the Field Poll, said he believes many voters had expected Congress and President Bush to work out a comprehensive immigration bill by now and the lack of a deal has disappointed them.
"Voters were led to believe that there would be some kind of immigration reform coming out of Washington," DiCamillo said. "But it never took hold, there was too much opposition and it's led to a great deal of frustration on this issue."
A Field Poll from July 2006 found that even during better economic times, 58 percent of Californians believed the problem of illegal immigration was a serious one; with 71 percent saying the number of federal agents patrolling the border should be increased.
The new poll did not include any follow-up questions about immigration, although the issue was mentioned more frequently among voters in Los Angeles County - 30 percent - than voters in the Bay Area (21 percent) and in Southern California outside of Los Angeles (19 percent.)
Bill Hing, a law professor who specializes in immigration issues from UC Davis, said there has been a great of media coverage of the border issues and illegal immigration over the past two years as a result of efforts in Washington to overhaul the laws and the many protest marches put on by pro-immigrant groups.
"I really think there's a lot of Americans who don't think immigration is that big a deal," he said. "But when you had these big demonstrations with people waving the Mexican flag - the truth is many Americans don't like seeing pro-immigration protests."
Hing and Regalado also noted that several popular talk-radio stations - mostly in Southern California - and CNN commentator Lou Dobbs have made immigration a central theme of their broadcasts.
*

LOS ANGELES COUNTY SPENDS 37 MILLION... ONE MONTH... WELFARE FOR ILLEGALS!

Welfare and food stamp benefits soar $3 million higher than September payout. New statistics from the Department of Public Social Services reveal that illegal aliens and their families in Los Angeles County collected over $37 million in welfare and food stamp allocations in November 2007 – up $3 million dollars from September, announced Los Angeles County Supervisor Michael D. Antonovich. Twenty five percent of the all welfare and food stamps benefits is going directly to the children of illegal aliens. Illegals collected over $20 million in welfare assistance for November 2007 and over $16 million in monthly food stamp allocations for a projected annual cost of $444 million. “This new information shows an alarming increase in the devastating impact Illegal immigration continues to have on Los Angeles County taxpayers,” said Antonovich. “With $220 million for public safety, $400 million for healthcare, and $444 million in welfare allocations, the total cost for illegal immigrants to County taxpayers far exceeds $1 billion a year – not including the millions of dollars for education.”

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1949085/posts
*
Illegal alien population may be as high as 38 million

Study: Illegal alien population may be as high as 38 million A new report finds the Homeland Security Department "grossly underestimates" the number of illegal aliens living in the U.S. Homeland Security's Office of Immigration Studies released a report August 31 that estimates the number of illegal aliens residing in the U.S. is between 8 and 12 million. But the group Californians for Population Stabilization, or CAPS, has unveiled a report estimating the illegal population is actually between 20 and 38 million. Four experts, all of whom contributed to the study prepared by CAPS, discussed their findings at a news conference at the National Press Club in Washington Wednesday. James Walsh, a former associate general counsel of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, said he is "appalled" that the Bush administration, lawyers on the Senate Judiciary Committee, and every Democratic presidential candidate, with the exception of Joe Biden, have no problem with sanctuary cities for illegal aliens. "Ladies and gentlemen, the sanctuary cities and the people that support them are violating the laws of the United States of America. They're violating 8 USC section 1324 and 1325, which is a felony -- [it's] a felony to aid, support, transport, shield, harbor illegal aliens," Walsh stated. Walsh said his analysis indicating there are 38 million illegal aliens in the U.S. was calculated using the conservative estimate of three illegal immigrants entering the U.S. for each one apprehended. According to Walsh, "In the United States, immigration is in a state of anarchy -- not chaos, but anarchy."

IT’S ALSO THE NEXT GENERATION AFTER GENERATION OF “CHEAP” (FOR EMPLOYERS) MEXICAN LABOR......!

http://www.capsweb.org/action/activist_tool_kit.html

LOS ANGELES TIMES
60 million Californians by mid-century

Riverside will become the second most populous county behind Los Angeles and Latinos the dominant ethnic group, study says.By Maria L. La Ganga and Sara LinTimes Staff WritersJuly 10, 2007Over the next half-century, California's population will explode by nearly 75%, and Riverside will surpass its bigger neighbors to become the second most populous county after Los Angeles, according to state Department of Finance projections released Monday. California will near the 60-million mark in 2050, the study found, raising questions about how the state will look and function and where all the people and their cars will go. Dueling visions pit the iconic California building block of ranch house, big yard and two-car garage against more dense, high-rise development.But whether sprawl or skyscrapers win the day, the Golden State will probably be a far different and more complex place than it is today, as people live longer and Latinos become the dominant ethnic group, eclipsing all others combined.Some critics forecast disaster if gridlock and environmental impacts are not averted. Others see a possible economic boon, particularly for retailers and service industries with an eye on the state as a burgeoning market."It's opportunity with baggage," said Jack Kyser, chief economist for the Los Angeles County Economic Development Corp., in "a country masquerading as a state."Other demographers argue that the huge population increase the state predicts will occur only if officials complete major improvements to roads and other public infrastructure. Without that investment, they say, some Californians would flee the state.If the finance department's calculations hold, California's population will rise from 34.1 million in 2000 to 59.5 million at the mid-century point, about the same number of people as Italy has today. And its projected growth rate in those 50 years will outstrip the national rate — nearly 75% compared with less than 50% projected by the federal government. That could translate to increased political clout in Washington, D.C. Southern California's population is projected to grow at a rate of more than 60%, according to the new state figures, reaching 31.6 million by mid-century. That's an increase of 12.1 million over just seven counties.L.A. County alone will top 13 million by 2050, an increase of almost 3.5 million residents. And Riverside County — long among the fastest-growing in the state — will triple in population to 4.7 million by mid-century.Riverside County will add 3.1 million people, according to the new state figures, eclipsing Orange and San Diego to become the second most populous in the state. With less expensive housing than the coast, Riverside County has grown by more than 472,000 residents since 2000, according to state estimates.But many residents face agonizingly long commutes to work in other areas. And Monday, the state's growth projections raised some concerns in the Inland Empire.Registered nurse Fifi Bo moved from Los Angeles to Corona nine years ago so she could buy a house and avoid urban congestion. But she'd consider moving even farther east now that Riverside County is grappling with its own crowding problems."But where am I going? People used to move to Victorville, but [housing prices in] Victorville already got high," the 36-year-old said as she fretted about traffic and smog and public services stretched thin. "We don't know where to go. Maybe Arizona."John Husing, an economist who studies the Inland Empire, is betting that even in land-rich Riverside County, more vertical development is on the horizon. Part of the reason: a multi-species habitat conservation plan that went into effect in 2005, preserving 550,000 acres of green space that otherwise would have vanished."The difficult thing will be for anybody who likes where they live in Riverside County because it's rural," Husing said. "In 2050, you might still find rural out by Blythe, but other than that, forget rural."Husing predicts that growth will be most dramatic beyond the city of Riverside as the patches of empty space around communities such as Palm Springs, Perris and Hemet begin to fill in with housing tracts. The Coachella Valley, for example, will become fully developed and seem like less of a distinct area outside of Riverside, he said. "It'll be desert urban, but it'll be urban. Think of Phoenix," he said. Expect a lot of the new development in Riverside County to go up along the 215 Freeway between Perris and Murrieta, according to Riverside County Planning Director Ron Goldman. Thousands of homes have popped up in that area in the last decade, and Goldman said applications for that area indicate condominiums are next. The department is so busy that he's hiring 10 people who'll start in the next month."We have over 5,000 active development applications in processing right now," he said.No matter how much local governments build in the way of public works and how many new jobs are attracted to the region — minimizing the need for long commutes — Husing figures that growth will still overwhelm the area's roads.USC Professor Genevieve Giuliano, an expert on land use and transportation, would probably agree. Such massive growth, if it occurs, she said, will require huge investment in the state's highways, schools, and energy and sewer systems at a "very formidable cost."If those things aren't built, Giuliano questioned whether the projected population increases will occur. "Sooner or later, the region will not be competitive and the growth is not going to happen," she said.If major problems like traffic congestion and housing costs aren't addressed, Giuliano warned, the middle class is going to exit California, leaving behind very high-income and very low-income residents. "It's a political question," said Martin Wachs, a transportation expert at the Rand Corp. in Santa Monica. "Do we have the will, the consensus, the willingness to pay? If we did, I think we could manage the growth."The numbers released Monday underscore most demographers' view that the state's population is pushing east, from both Los Angeles and the Bay Area, to counties such as Riverside and San Bernardino as well as half a dozen or so smaller Central Valley counties.Sutter County, for example, is expected to be the fastest-growing on a percentage basis between 2000 and 2050, jumping 255% to a population of 282,894 , the state said. Kern County is expected to see its population more than triple to 2.1 million by mid-century.In Southern California, San Diego County is projected to grow by almost 1.7 million residents and Orange County by 1.1 million. Even Ventura County — where voters have imposed some limits on urban sprawl — will see its population jump 62% to more than 1.2 million if the projections hold.The Department of Finance releases long-term population projections every three years. Between the last two reports, number crunchers have taken a more detailed look at California's statistics and taken into account the likelihood that people will live longer, said chief demographer Mary Heim.The result?The latest numbers figure the state will be much more crowded than earlier estimates (by nearly 5 million) and that it will take a bit longer than previously thought for Latinos to become the majority of California's population: 2042, not 2038.The figures show that the majority of California's growth will be in the Latino population, said Dowell Myers, a professor of urban planning and demography at USC, adding that "68% of the growth this decade will be Latino, 75% next and 80% after that."That should be a wake-up call for voting Californians, Myers said, pointing out a critical disparity. Though the state's growth is young and Latino, the majority of voters will be older and white — at least for the next decade."The future of the state is Latino growth," Myers said. "We'd sure better invest in them and get them up to speed. Older white voters don't see it that way. They don't realize that someone has to replace them in the work force, pay for their benefits and buy their house."