Voters Swing 17 Points Against Biden’s Migration Policies

Public opinion has shifted 17 points against President Joe Biden’s loose migration policies, according to polls by Morning Consult for Politico.

The August 28-30 poll of 1,997 registered voters shows Biden with 55 percent opposition and just 36 percent support. In April, Biden had 45 percent opposition and 43 percent support on immigration.

This 17-point shift is echoed by other negative polls in August — and it may upset the Democrats’ plan to rush four massive, wage-cutting amnesties through the Senate in the fall.

The September data also shows that only eight percent of independents still strongly support Biden’s immigration policies. Forty percent of independents strongly oppose those policies, 19 percent “somewhat” oppose his policies, and 14 percent have no opinion.

Thirty-one percent of Hispanics strongly oppose Biden’s policies, while 19 percent strongly support those policies, according to the poll.

Overall, the polling shift leaves Biden in the same boat as President Barack Obama shortly before his congressional defeat in the 2014 midterm elections.

The shift is all the more notable because GOP leaders prefer not to talk about the pocketbook damage done to Americans by the government’s inflow of low-wage workers and apartment-sharing renters. Instead, GOP leaders prefer to talk about subsidiary issues, such as chaos on the border and drug smuggling.

The polling drop helps to explain why some officials have welcomed the August directive by federal judges to stop the release of job-seeking migrants into the United States, according to a September 6 report in the New York Times:

But among some Biden officials, the Supreme Court’s order was quietly greeted with something other than dismay, current and former officials said: It brought some measure of relief.

…

In fact, some Biden officials were already talking about reviving Mr. Trump’s policy in a limited way to deter migration, said the officials, who have worked on immigration policy but were not authorized to speak publicly about the administration’s internal debates on the issue. Then the Supreme Court order came, providing the Biden administration with the political cover to adopt the policy in some form without provoking as much ire from Democrats who reviled Mr. Trump’s border policies.

However, the talk about curbs is a political calculation before the 2022 mid-term election. The New York Times article offers no evidence that Biden’s officials believe Americans’ prosperity is more important than the pressure from business donors and progressives to import migrant workers, consumers, renters, chaotic diversity, and potential voters.

The New York Times report also provides some evidence for a split in the White House between Biden’s long-time East coast political allies and the West Coast alliance of pro-migration progressive,s led by Vice President Kamala Harris, DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, and West Coast investors represented by Mark Zuckerberg’s FWD.us advocacy group.

So far, the Western faction has been dominant in the White House and is on track to import double the 2020 immigrant inflow to 1.6 million. That inflow is roughly equal to one migrant for every two American births.

But Biden’s deputies are pushing back. For example, last week, Biden’s White House staff appointed a Biden ally to monitor the unpopular Afghan migration that is being pushed by Mayorkas, a Cuban-born immigration zealot. The Washington Post reported September 3:

President Biden has tapped a former governor of his home state, Jack Markell, to temporarily serve as his point person on resettling Afghan evacuees in the United States, White House officials said Friday.

However, Democrats have a card up their sleeves for the 2022 election — GOP leaders do not want to mention the pocketbook costs of Biden’s migration wave.

Republican leaders oppose the Democrats’ pending amnesty. But the donor-funded GOP leaders — such as Rep. John Katko (R-NY) — do not want to promise any fix for the pocketbook impact of migration on Americans communities. Instead, they try to steer voters’ concerns towards subsidiary non-economic issues, such as migrant crime, the border wall, border chaos, and drug smuggling.

However, populist-minded Republican leaders, including Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR), Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX), and Rep. Jim Banks (R-IN), have defended the economic interests of Americans.

Migration is deeply unpopular because it damages ordinary Americans’ career opportunities, cuts their wages, raises their rents, curbs their productivity, shrinks their political clout, widens regional wealth gaps, and wrecks their democratic, equality-promoting civic culture.

For many years, a wide variety of pollsters have shown deep and broad opposition to labor migration and the inflow of temporary contract workers into jobs sought by young U.S. graduates.

Thi pocketbook opposition is multiracial, cross-sex, non-racist, class-based, bipartisan,  rational, persistent, and recognizes the solidarity Americans owe to each other.