Amnesty, Guest Workers, Fences! Oh My! Public Opinion about “Comprehensive Immigration Reform”

Abstract

Prior to 2001, scholars studying public opinion about immigration policy were largely confined to analyzing the question of whether the number of immigrants allowed into the country should be increased, decreased, or kept the same. Then 2001 brought both the George W. Bush presidency and the attacks on 9/11, which led to a new discourse on immigration policy and, consequently, an entirely new range of survey questions. Americans are now regularly asked for their views on complex reform proposals, including types of guest worker programs, conditions for illegal immigrants to earn legal status, and employer sanctions. But we still know little about the dynamics of public opinion on these policy debates. Moreover, we know little about the best way to even ask people for their views on these complicated matters. The two primary goals of this paper are to document the changes in how public opinion about immigration policy has been gauged during the Bush years and to make sense of emerging patterns that the data show. The first section reviews the political climate surrounding immigration discourse from 2001 to 2008. The second section analyzes the number and nature of survey questions related to immigration policy asked during that time period. The final section examines patterns of aggregate public opinion on these new policy questions. It considers whether external events have shaped public opinion on these emerging issues, how the ways in which questions are asked shape responses, and if opinion has been stable or erratic. The results reveal a high level of stability over time, with most variation in preferences attributable to question wording. The results also show a high level of support for immigrant friendly policies, including earned legalization.