A May 2020 question asked respondents if they favored admitting more foreign workers for blue collar jobs, just 54 percent of Democrats agreed that it is “better for businesses to raise the pay and try harder to recruit non-working Americans even if it causes prices to rise.”
But that score jumped 10 points, to 64 percent, in the post-election November 15-19 poll of 1,250 likely voters.
Similarly, in the May poll, 33 percent of Democrats said they preferred government to “bring in new foreign workers to help keep business costs and prices down.” In November, the response dropped 1o points to 23 percent, and the share of Democrats favoring cheap labor migration dropped from one-third to one-quarter.
A smaller shift was seen among self-described liberals. Their preference for Americans rose from just from 58 percent before the election up to 61 percent after the election. Their support for extra foreign workers slumped from a pre-election share of 30 percent down to 24 percent after the election.
The November poll showed few significant shifts among Republicans, “other” voters, or moderates.
The Democratic shift towards pro-American migration policies is bad political news for Democratic leaders who expect Democratic legislators to import more cheap labor for special interests, such as New York City, and for establishment donors, such as the investors at FWD.us, the Business Roundtable, or the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
Just 19 percent of all voters support the establishment’s preference for importing foreign workers. Sixty-six percent prefer the populist demand for “businesses to raise the pay and try harder to recruit non-working Americans,” according to the Rasmussen data.
That is 3.5-to-1 opposition — and the GOP is hoping to win a House majority in just 24 months.
Many other polls show deep and broad opposition to cheap labor migration — and to the inflow of temporary contract workers — such as H-1B and OPT workers — for the technology and management jobs sought by American graduates.
The Rasmussen “Immigration Index” is a fever chart of the public’s fluctuating priorities on immigration limits. For example, when President Donald Trump enforced the law, the chart ran high with increased Democratic opposition. But with Biden heading towards the White House — while threatening to loosen border controls — Democrats are not voicing more support for the border curbs that protect their jobs and wages from ruthless CEOs and desperate migrants.
“With likely new President Joe Biden vowing to undo many of the immigration restrictions imposed by President Trump, the Rasmussen Reports Immigration Index … fell to 96.6 from 102.6 the week before, said a report by Rasmussen Reports.
The Rasmussen index is a fever chart of the public’s contradictory feelings towards immigration limits. For example, when President Donald Trump enforced the law, the chart ran high with increased Democratic opposition.
When businesses say they are having trouble finding Americans to take jobs in construction, manufacturing, hospitality and other service work, 66% of voters [up from 64 percent in May, 2020] say it is better for the country if these businesses raise the pay and try harder to recruit non-working Americans even if it causes prices to rise. Just 19% disagree [vs. 23 percent in May] and say it’s better for the country if the government brings in new foreign workers to help keep business costs and prices down. This is a new high and ties the low for this question. Sixteen percent (16%) are undecided.
In 2019, Trump’s lower migration policies helped to spike Americans’ median household income by 7 percent.
In contrast, Biden and his team want to flood Americans’ labor market with foreign workers and flood Americans’ housing market with foreign renters.
Migration moves money from employees to employers, from families to investors, from young to old, from children to their parents, from homebuyers to real estate investors, and from the central states to the coastal states.
Migration also allows investors and CEOs to skimp on labor-saving technology, sideline U.S. minorities, ignore disabled people, exploit stoop labor in the fields, shortchange labor in the cities, impose tight control and pay cuts on American professionals, corral technological innovation by minimizing the employment of American graduates, undermine Americans’ labor rights, and redirect progressive journalists to cheerlead for Wall Street’s priorities and claims.