Source: CENTER FOR IMMIGRATION STUDIES, 9/17/18

[From a blog post by CIS Senior Fellow in Law and Policy Andrew Arthur]

A column in the Wall Street Journal this week underscored how important immigration enforcement is as an issue in the most critical races for the House of Representatives.

Titled "How Republicans Could Still Win", the opinion piece by Kimberly Strassel details the results of polling (which has yet to be released) conducted by data firm WPAi for the Club for Growth of 1,000 likely voters in 41 hotly contested House districts. That polling indicates that many of those races can be won by Republicans if they "have the courage of their convictions and get smarter in tailoring their messages to voters."

View the full blog at https://cis.org/Arthur/Immigration-Enforcement-Key-Issue-Uncommitted-Voters

A key takeaway is the following:
Republicans have an opportunity in highlighting the left's more doolally ideas. Uncommitted voters reacted strongly against Democrats' calls to abolish Immigration and Customs Enforcement [ICE], and strongly in favor of GOP promises to defund "sanctuary" cities and states, which refuse to follow immigration law. These were top messages for those crucial suburban voters, who have watched in alarm as urban violence creeps into their neighborhoods.

As a whole, this is important information that you are unlikely to glean from most media outlets. The "Abolish ICE" movement has received a lot of attention in the media and been embraced by some key Democrats (as I detailed in a July 2018 post). That said, a number of pundits have warned that it may not be a winning issue for Democrats in November.

The support of uncommitted voters for Republican efforts to defund sanctuary cities and states, on the other hand, is a story that is rarely told.

For most conservatives that I know, this is a hot button issue: The idea that a state or locality would flout federal law and hinder its enforcement, while still demanding continued federal funding, is inconsistent at best and hypocritical at worst. Further, the fact that such policies really only shield criminals is a story that is not often reported, or discussed in the media by and large.

Kimberly Strassel's column, however, suggests that this point is not lost on the public as a whole. Crime is a perpetual concern, and the specter of criminal violence weighs on voters of all political stripes. That uncommitted voters have managed to connect the dots indicates that it is an issue on which they are focused.

With good reason. In my hometown of Baltimore, we have plenty of home-grown criminals (as popular culture has reflected), and do not need any more. That has not stopped States Attorney Marilyn Mosby from instructing her staff "to think twice before charging illegal immigrants with minor, non-violent crimes in response to stepped up immigration enforcement by the Trump administration," as I reported in a May 2017 post captioned "Two Sets of Rules in Mobtown".

In a July 2018 post captioned "Poll: Immigration a Leading Issue Heading into Midterms", I broke down a Reuters poll that showed "immigration was the top issue for U.S. voters heading into the November 2018 midterm elections, edging out the economy on the list of Americans' concerns." I noted, however, that the importance of this topic did not cut evenly along party lines.

"Immigration" as an issue can mean different things to different people. For conservatives, it can mean immigration enforcement, while for progressives, it can mean amnesty. Kimberly Strassel's column makes clear, however, that enforcement of the immigration laws is a key issue for those voters who matter the most, and who will likely decide who has control of the House in the 116th Congress.