Go to HHH home page.
Smart Politics
 


Anti Illegal Immigration Sentiment Strong in Minnesota, though Weaker than Most of the Nation

Bookmark and Share

Arizona immigration law enjoys majority support in Minnesota, though lower than most states

While public opinion polling has shown consistent, majority support across the country for both the specifics of Arizona's new law to combat illegal immigration as well as the general legal principals behind it, that support varies substantially from state to state from extremely supportive to only moderately supportive.

Minnesota seems to fit into the latter category, according to recent polling.

The Rasmussen polling organization has conducted interviews of 500 likely voters in each of 16 states over the past three weeks with a small array of questions on illegal immigration issues.

Of the 16 states polled, Minnesota ranks next to last in terms of how closely its residents are following the Arizona immigration news story, fourth to last in terms of favoring passage of a similar law in the Gopher State, and second to last in terms of support for the legal principal behind the Arizona law.

Over the past three weeks, Rasmussen has polled residents from the southern (Arkansas, Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky), Midwestern (Indiana, Minnesota, Missouri, North Dakota, Ohio, Wisconsin), northeastern (Connecticut, New Hampshire, Rhode Island), and western (Oregon, Washington) regions of the country on illegal immigration.

When asked how closely residents have been following news stories about Arizona's immigration law, 45 percent replied "very closely" in Minnesota, which was the second lowest among those states surveyed and seven points below the 52 percent average across the 16-state sample.

Perhaps due to the potential greater geographical impact of the law and proximity to Arizona, the west coast states (both surveyed the same week as Minnesota) have been following the story much more closely, with Oregon at 65 percent and Washington at 63 percent.

Midwestern states were at the bottom of the list in terms of the percentage following the story very closely with Wisconsin at 50 percent, Missouri, Indiana, and Ohio at 47 percent, Minnesota at 45 percent, and North Dakota at 42 percent.

In terms of support for adopting passage of Arizona's immigration law in its own state, 53 percent of Minnesotans favored such a law, with just 34 percent opposed.

Still, that support was higher than only three deep blue states of those 16 surveyed to date: Connecticut (48 percent), Rhode Island (50 percent), and Washington (52 percent).

The highest level of support for adopting the Arizona measure in their own state came from residents in the southern states of Arkansas and Kentucky (63 percent each).

When asked about the general legal principal behind the Arizona law, Minnesotans were much more supportive: 62 percent stated an officer should be required to check the immigration status of someone suspected of being an illegal immigrant if already stopped for a traffic violation or other violation of the law. Just 27 percent were opposed.

Still, despite more than 2:1 support for the measure, Minnesota ranked second lowest among the 16 states on support for this anti-illegal immigration legal principal, higher than only Washington (54 percent).

Overwhelming majorities of likely voters in Arkansas (81 percent), Alabama (79 percent), Kentucky (78 percent), North Dakota (75 percent), Missouri (74 percent), Indiana (72 percent), Georgia (72 percent), and Ohio (70 percent) were in favor of this more aggressive local police force role in the battle against illegal immigration.

An average of 69 percent were supportive of such a law across the 16 states, with just 21 percent opposed.

While support for these anti-illegal immigration measures is comparatively low in Minnesota compared to the rest of the country, Minnesotans have generally been in line with tough laws to control the nation's borders in recent years.

For example, a January 2006 Rasmussen poll found 59 percent of Minnesotans favored a barrier be built across the U.S. - Mexican border to help reduce illegal immigration, with just 26 percent opposed.

An April 2006 Rasmussen poll found that over half of Minnesotans (56 percent) were opposed to the legal principal that a child born in the USA from a female illegal immigrant should automatically become a citizen of the United States. Just 29 percent believed that child should automatically become a citizen.

That same poll also found less than half of Minnesotans (44 percent) opposed forcible deportation of 11+ million illegal aliens who were in the nation at that time. One-third (33 percent) supported such deportation, while about one-quarter (23 percent) were not sure.

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Previous post: Will Minnesotans Elect a Plurality-Winning Governor for a 4th Straight Cycle?
Next post: Roxanne Conlin Poised to Hold Iowa U.S. Senate, Gubernatorial Records

2 Comments


  • The irony is that for all the overexcited debate, the net effect of immigration is minimal (about a one tenth of 1 percent gain in GDP). Even for those most acutely affected—say, low-skilled workers, or California residents—the impact isn't all that dramatic. The shrill voices have tended to dominate our perceptions. But when all those factors are put together and the economists crunch the numbers, it ends up being a net positive, but a small one. Too bad most people don't realize it.

  • If anything is important in the discussion of U.S. Immigration, it's that we need a system in place that can help people come to the United States legally and avoid the issues that are currently a challenge to all involved.

  • Leave a comment


    Remains of the Data

    Is There a Presidential Drag On Gubernatorial Elections?

    Only five of the 20 presidents to serve since 1900 have seen their party win a majority of gubernatorial elections during their administrations, and only one since JFK.

    Political Crumbs

    Strike Three for Miller-Meeks

    Iowa Republicans had a banner day on November 4th, picking up both a U.S. Senate seat and one U.S. House seat, but Mariannette Miller-Meeks' defeat in her third attempt to oust Democrat Dave Loebsack in the 2nd CD means the GOP will not have a monopoly on the state's congressional delegation in the 114th Congress. The loss by Miller-Meeks (following up her defeats in 2008 and 2010) means major party nominees who lost their first two Iowa U.S. House races are now 0 for 10 the third time around in Iowa history. Miller-Meeks joins Democrat William Leffingwell (1858, 1868, 1870), Democrat Anthony Van Wagenen (1894, 1912 (special), 1912), Democrat James Murtagh (1906, 1914, 1916), Democrat Clair Williams (1944, 1946, 1952), Democrat Steven Carter (1948, 1950, 1956), Republican Don Mahon (1966, 1968, 1970), Republican Tom Riley (1968, 1974, 1976), Democrat Eric Tabor (1986, 1988, 1990), and Democrat Bill Gluba (1982, 1988, 2004) on the Hawkeye State's Three Strikes list.


    Larry Pressler Wins the Silver

    Larry Pressler may have fallen short in his long-shot, underfunded, and understaffed bid to return to the nation's upper legislative chamber, but he did end up notching the best showing for a non-major party South Dakota U.S. Senate candidate in more than 90 years. Pressler won 17.1 percent of the vote which is the best showing for an independent or third party U.S. Senate candidate in the state since 1920 when non-partisan candidate Tom Ayres won 24.1 percent in a race won by Republican Peter Norbeck. Overall, Pressler's 17.1 percent is good for the second best mark for a non-major party candidate across the 35 U.S. Senate contests in South Dakota history. Independent and third party candidates have appeared on the South Dakota U.S. Senate ballot just 25 times over the last century and only three have reached double digits: Pressler in 2014 and Ayres in 1920 and 1924 (12.1 percent). Pressler's defeat means he won't become the oldest candidate elected to the chamber in South Dakota history nor notch the record for the longest gap in service in the direct election era.


    more POLITICAL CRUMBS

    Humphrey School Sites
    CSPG
    Humphrey New Media Hub

    Issues />

<div id=
    Abortion
    Afghanistan
    Budget and taxes
    Campaign finances
    Crime and punishment
    Economy and jobs
    Education
    Energy
    Environment
    Foreign affairs
    Gender
    Health
    Housing
    Ideology
    Immigration
    Iraq
    Media
    Military
    Partisanship
    Race and ethnicity
    Reapportionment
    Redistricting
    Religion
    Sexuality
    Sports
    Terrorism
    Third parties
    Transportation
    Voting