2013 State of Indian Nations Address
Feb 14, 2013

National Congress of American Indians

 

 

Jefferson Keel his annual State of Indian Nations address. President Keel said he plans to ask the federal government to exempt Natives American tribes from the sequestration cuts, scheduled to go into effect March 1, 2013. He also called on the U.S. House to reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act and for Congress to pass comprehensive immigration reform. The address took place at the Newseum in Washington, DC. The event also included remarks from Senate Indian Affairs Committee Chairman Maria Cantwell. President Keel was introduced by Jacqueline Pata, Executive Director, National Congress of American Indians.

Says "overwhelming majorities of Americans" support gun legislation "like background checks."

Barack Obama on Tuesday, February 12th, 2013 in the State of the Union Address

The Truth-O-Meter Says:

President 

Barack Obama used his 2013 State of

 the Union address to urge Congress

 to vote on legislation to reduce gun violence.

President Barack Obama says an 'overwhelming' majority supports gun legislation like background checks

Victims of recent attacks deserve it, he said, and voters support some "common-sense reform."

"Overwhelming majorities of Americans – Americans who believe in the 2nd Amendment – have come together around common-sense reform – like background checks that will make it harder for criminals to get their hands on a gun," he told lawmakers.

Do "overwhelming majorities of Americans" support gun legislation such as background checks?

The evidence

Viewers who watched an enhanced version of Obama’s speech online at WhiteHouse.gov saw a graphic that said "92 percent of Americans support background checks for gun buyers."

It cited an independent poll from Quinnipiac University, which we quickly found on the university’s site.

The results from the phone poll of 1,772 registered voters in late January and early February 2013 were straightforward:

• It found 92 percent support for background checks for all gun buyers, which the Quinnipiac pollsters described as "overwhelming."

• It found 91 percent support for universal background checks among voters in a household with a gun.

Other polls we’ve cited in recent fact-checks also found high percentages of support for universal background checks, even among gun owners.

A Pew Research Center poll from Jan. 9-13, 2013, of 1,502 adults found 85 percent of Americans (and 85 percent of gun owners) favor making private gun sales and sales at gun shows subject to background checks.

A CBS/New York Times poll conducted Jan. 11-15 among 1,110 adults showed that 92 percent of Americans (and 85 percent of respondents living in a household with an NRA member) support universal background checks.

Obama did cherry-pick the gun-control proposal on which consensus is strongest -- background checks. Other proposals he might also call "common-sense," such as bans on assault weapons and high capacity magazines, held 56 percent support in the Quinnipiac poll. And they were narrowly opposed by voters in households with a gun, with 52 percent against such measures.

Our ruling

Obama said "overwhelming majorities of Americans" support gun legislation "like background checks." The poll cited by the administration, as well as other independent polls in 2013, do show support for universal background checks above 80 percent among voters, even those who own guns.

But people would get the impression from Obama's statement that there is similar support for other White House gun proposals, when the reality is weaker majority support among voters and slim opposition among gun owners. That’s a point worth clarifying. We rate the president’s claim Mostly True.

Abbreviated Pundit Round-up: Polls and politics

by Greg DworkinFollow for Daily Kos
Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 04:30 AM PST 

From Washington Post

New Bloomberg poll shows Obama at 3-yr job approval high, 55%

— @HotlineJosh via UberSocial for BlackBerry
Bloomberg:

Obama’s positive standing with the public provides him with political leverage as Americans assess blame for any furloughs, disruption of government services or damage to the economy if the spending cuts aren’t averted. The repercussions also could help shape the battleground for the 2014 midterm congressional elections.

Beyond the fiscal showdown, the poll shows traction for the president on immigration, with 47 percent approval of his handling of the issue compared with 38 percent disapproval. Fifty-three percent of Americans support a path to citizenship while 18 percent back a process toward legal status for illegal residents already in the country if certain conditions are met.

Feelings toward Obama are the most positive since December 2009, with 56 percent of Americans holding a favorable opinion of the president and 40 percent a negative one. The Democratic Party he leads is viewed favorably by 47 percent and unfavorably by 43 percent.

Public views of congressional Republicans’ record places an added burden on them in the standoff over automatic spending cuts. Americans by 43 percent to 34 percent say they are more to blame than Obama and Democrats for “what’s gone wrong” in Washington. Still, another 23 percent aren’t sure which side bears more responsibility. So Chuck Hagel will be confirmed, the WH will ultimately win on the sequester (goes into effect, to be rescinded later) and the press will still fail to focus on what a disaster the GOP is.

Chris Cillizza:
And that maxim is why Republicans in Congress would do well to avoid a confrontation with President Obama over the sequester.

Here’s why — in 3 very simple steps:

1. Regular people have no idea what the sequester is right now and, even once it kicks in, aren’t likely to pay all that close of attention to it unless they are directly affected by it.
2. Obama is popular with the American public
3. Congress is not.

Maggie Haberman:
After his electoral wipeout in November — and motivated by years of resentment that’s spilling over — Rove’s credibility within his own party is at an all-time low. More polling and politics below the fold.

Josh Barro:
Unlike many on the right, Gerson, Wehner and Ponnuru have correctly diagnosed the economic challenges that Republicans aren't addressing. (Gerson and Wehner identify "stagnant wages, the loss of blue-collar jobs, exploding health-care and college costs.") And they have even advanced some ideas that would improve matters.
But the key word there is "some": All three writers leave unaddressed major Republican stumbling blocks with the middle class. Particularly, they are far from developing health-care and fiscal policies that can serve middle-class interests.

There are two big middle-class problems with health care. Costs have risen too fast, eating away at wages, and many people can't afford health insurance. Democrats have, in the form of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, enacted policies that mostly fix the second problem and take some steps to deal with the first. Republicans have no plausible agenda on either, and neither of these pieces provides much useful guidance. and

Josh Barro:
Why would a reformed, reality-based Republican Party be different from the Democrats and therefore useful? I can think of a few important reasons, which are the reasons that I remain, however reluctantly, a Republican.

NY Times magazine has an extraordinary story of "The Extraordinary Science of Addictive Junk Food":
According to the sources I spoke with, Sanger began by reminding the group that consumers were “fickle.” (Sanger declined to be interviewed.) Sometimes they worried about sugar, other times fat. General Mills, he said, acted responsibly to both the public and shareholders by offering products to satisfy dieters and other concerned shoppers, from low sugar to added whole grains. But most often, he said, people bought what they liked, and they liked what tasted good. “Don’t talk to me about nutrition,” he reportedly said, taking on the voice of the typical consumer. “Talk to me about taste, and if this stuff tastes better, don’t run around trying to sell stuff that doesn’t taste good.”

To react to the critics, Sanger said, would jeopardize the sanctity of the recipes that had made his products so successful. General Mills would not pull back. He would push his people onward, and he urged his peers to do the same. Sanger’s response effectively ended the meeting.

“What can I say?” James Behnke told me years later. “It didn’t work. These guys weren’t as receptive as we thought they would be.” Behnke chose his words deliberately. He wanted to be fair. “Sanger was trying to say, ‘Look, we’re not going to screw around with the company jewels here and change the formulations because a bunch of guys in white coats are worried about obesity.’ ”

The meeting was remarkable, first, for the insider admissions of guilt. But I was also struck by how prescient the organizers of the sit-down had been. Today, one in three adults is considered clinically obese, along with one in five kids, and 24 million Americans are afflicted by type 2 diabetes, often caused by poor diet, with another 79 million people having pre-diabetes. Even gout, a painful form of arthritis once known as “the rich man’s disease” for its associations with gluttony, now afflicts eight million Americans.

I disagree with Chris on point #1 (29+ / 0-)

The CBS evening news, the most conservative of evening news broadcasts, took great pains to explain the sequester last night and pointed out many of the ways it would effect the country including, specifically:
one day furlough for DoD workers who provide therapy for soliders (yes, they showed pictures of soldiers with no legs getting PT); a cut back to 4 air craft carriers (from 9) and that it would take up 9-12 months to reactivate them once they're shut down. They showed the FDA person saying they'd have to cut food inspections and that might result in more food borne illnesses; they showed some lady in NYC talking about cutting law enforcement and counter-terrorism efforts and it putting more strain on the department and security activities. They showed the TSA and said how they'd be majorly cut making air travel less safe.
It was, IMO, a conservative argument against the sequester, focused mostly on security and the military but it was fucking scary to think about.
I find ABC and NBC evening news to be more liberal and I can only imagine what they had on their broadcasts.
No, I think this week the american public is getting a crash course in "what is a sequester" but moreso, the important things the government is doing everyday.

by mdmslle on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 04:39:34 AM PST

 Use that bully pulpit (11+ / 0-)

Time for the president to stand for his principles and level with the American people about the destructive, anti-American agenda of the Republican Party. What has "compromise" and attempts to appease the GOP brought us? A roller-coaster of artificial deadlines and legislative guns to the head of the American people that have led to serious damage to our economy. No more hand-holding of the GOP. time to smack them in the face and state the obvious; that the GOP is only interested in obstruction and extremism, not healing our economy and governing America.  -  progressive

by LCLiberal on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 05:03:56 AM PST

 Good morning and thanks for the roundup, Greg! (16+ / 0-)

I'm glad people (columnists) are finally starting to pay attention to the idea that stagnant wages are a major problem in this country.  Financial gurus keep telling us that our "latte habit" is what's keeping us from becoming rich.  Well, what if we make our coffee at home and STILL don't have an extra $5 a day?  These financial gurus are so insulated from reality in their own rich little lives that they have no conception of how the rest of us live.
I worry about the sequester because the much-maligned civil servants will suffer.  Most people live from paycheck to paycheck.  Here in the Washington, DC area, "those government workers who don't do any work" are our neighbors, friends, and relatives.  They have long commutes and they do work--testing the air quality, directing air traffic, sending us our Social Security payments, processing our tax refunds.
My husband and I found it almost impossible to save money, other than 401(k) contributions, when our children were growing up.  It was only after they grew up, graduated from college, and went out to work that we were able to save any money at all.  Most people are one paycheck away from disaster and that worries me.

"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon

by Diana in NoVa on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 05:06:04 AM PST

•  I heard John Avalon (7+ / 0-)

  talking about minimum wage the other day on a radio talk show, and if wages had kept pace with inflation since the 1960s, minimum wage would be something like $10.13 an hour.
  Out west here, where a grocery store can be 30 miles away and gas is close to $4 a gallon, people can't make it on minimum wage.
  

  “We are not a nation that says ‘don’t ask, don’t tell.’ We are a nation that says ‘out of many, we are one.’” -Barack Obama

  by skohayes on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 05:59:24 AM PST

  
  

  •  From the Video footage that was some world class (3+ / 0-)

    alternative interrogation
    

    I want 1 less Tiny Coffin, Why Don't You? Support The President's Gun Violence Plan.

    by JML9999 on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 05:10:04 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

•  For those that are interested the book (10+ / 0-)

  "Fat Chance" by Robert Lustig, M.D. goes into great detail about how the food industry is pulling the same scam with the food we eat that the tobacco industry ran on the dangers of consuming their products.  Sugar content of our food has tripled in the last 30 years mirroring the rise in obesity and diabetis in this country and the whole world.  Sanger and his ilk are only concerned with their bottom line, not public health.
  

  "A different world cannot be built by indifferent people." Anon from a fortune cookie I got.

  by coloradocomet on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 05:11:40 AM PST

•  And we pay out $4.9 billion each year to (4+ / 0-)

  subsidize corn (the source of our explosion in sugar intake and in the diseases it causes), keeping the price down and production high and making the per calorie cost of potato chips far lower than the per calorie cost of carrots, for example.
  

  Between 1985 and 2010 the price of beverages sweetened with high-fructose corn syrup dropped 24 percent, and by 2006 American children consumed an extra 130 calories a day from these beverages. Over the same period the price of fresh fruits and vegetables rose 39 percent. For families on a budget, the price difference can be decisive in their food choices.

  http://www.scientificamerican.com/...

  The good we secure for ourselves is precarious and uncertain, is floating in mid-air, until it is secured for all of us and incorporated into our common life. Jane Addams

  by Alice Olson on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 05:32:33 AM PST

  [ Parent ]

•  Corn syrup (4+ / 0-)

  was used to replace cane sugar when price for cane sugar got out of hand a couple of decades ago.
  But sugar is sugar, there's just way too much of it in our foods.
  

  “We are not a nation that says ‘don’t ask, don’t tell.’ We are a nation that says ‘out of many, we are one.’” -Barack Obama

  by skohayes on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 06:03:35 AM PST

  [ Parent ]

•   Julianne Moore had a great line in The Forgotten: (3+ / 0-)

  "I'm trying to decide if I want too much sugar or too much salt."
  

  The Class, Terror and Climate Wars are indivisible and the short-term outcome will affect the planet for centuries. -WiA "When you triangulate everything, you can't even roll downhill..." - PhilJD

  by Words In Action on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 06:27:27 AM PST

  
  

  
  

•   .... (16+ / 0-)

  Before GOP continues on current path, it really ought to look at the latest nat'l polls http://t.co/... (typo fixed)
  — @stevebenen via TweetDeck

  and
  

  .@ron_fournier Mandate http://t.co/... "President Obama starts his second term with a clear upper hand over GOP leaders"
  — @DemFromCT via TweetDeck

  

  "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

  by Greg Dworkin on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 05:15:02 AM PST

• * [new]  ... (8+ / 0-)

  .@ron_fournier Mandate  http://t.co/... "Now just 22% of Americans, nearly a record low, consider themselves Republicans."
  — @DemFromCT via TweetDeck

  Tweaking Ron Fournier because: Obama Victory Comes With No Mandate
  

  "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

  by Greg Dworkin on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 05:33:10 AM PST

  
  

•   Washington Post today carried a front page (5+ / 0-)

  article about cybersecurity, focusing on attempts (and successes) of the Chinese to gain information on the inner workings of the U.S. government, including interactions with political organizations:
  

  The list of those hacked in recent years includes law firms, think tanks, news organizations, human rights groups, contractors, congressional offices, embassies and federal agencies.

  China is also suspected of stealing trade secrets and proprietary information from private businesses by hacking into their computer systems. In order to put more stringent laws in place to prevent and punish cyberhacking and spying, a bipartisan bill known as Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act, or CISPA (H.R. 624), has been reintroduced in the House by  by Chairman Mike Rogers (R-MI) and Ranking Member C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger (D-MD) of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.
  The Sunlight Foundation has introduced "Scout," a program that will alert you by email or text message of any official activity and votes on this bill including notices of upcoming hearings and when it's coming to the floor. The CISPA collection also has alerts you can follow about speeches in Congress that use the phrase "Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act" or "CISPA" and, for those interested in wider coverage, has alerts for any mentions of "Cybersecurity" in federal regulations and state-level bills.
  If you're interested in cybertheft of government data or proprietary information from business, this is a handy little tool to keep track of what congress is trying to do to address the problem.
  

  "In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican." - H. L. Mencken

  by SueDe on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 06:13:51 AM PST

•   The company I work for (4+ / 0-)

  has been the subject of  "spear phishing" attacks the last month or so:
  

  Generic emails asking employees to open malicious attachments, provide confidential information or follow links to infected websites have been around for a long time. What's new today is that the authors of these emails are now targeting their attacks using specific knowledge about employees and the organizations they work for. The inside knowledge used in these spear phishing attacks gains the trust of recipients. "Spear phishing is the most popular way to get into a corporate network these days," said Andrew Howard, a GTRI research scientist who heads up the organization's malware unit. "Because the malware authors now have some information about the people they are sending these to, they are more likely to get a response. When they know something about you, they can dramatically increase their odds."
  

  http://www.sciencedaily.com/... Most get picked up by our spam filter, but as the article says, it only takes one employee to open that attachment to an email that looks like it came from the corporate office.
  

  “We are not a nation that says ‘don’t ask, don’t tell.’ We are a nation that says ‘out of many, we are one.’” -Barack Obama

  by skohayes on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 06:27:36 AM PST

  [ Parent ]

•  If the Republican Party can find an (2+ / 0-)

  actual adult to take charge, and that could be insurmountably problematic, he or she should suggest to Mitch McConnell that he needs to consider his office a function of the greater good and nothead-up-the-ass obstruction.
  I want McConnell talked to, I want this to happen, I want McConnell brought up short, embarrassed, and newly deferential to the notion of what it means to be a public servant.
  But where will they find an actual adult to begin this dialogue and set an example?  Certainly not among their current Congressional caucus.  Certainly not on FOX News.  Certainly not on the Sunday talking head fests.
  "We hate almost everybody; vote for us" isn't that persuasive a campaign slogan for the upcoming midterms.
  

  by Remediator on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 06:18:55 AM PST

•  An actual adult to take charge of the (0+ / 0-)

  Republican party or begin a dialogue among Republicans won't be found in congress.  Republicans elected either to the House or Senate are too caught up in the D.C. bubble and/or too worried about re-election to see beyond obstruction and demonization of Democrats and the president.  Their party is splintering and they know it, but they're powerless - or disinclined - to do anything about it.
  

  "In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican." - H. L. Mencken

  by SueDe on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 07:24:03 AM PST

  [ Parent ]

•   It's easy to relish some schadenfreude over (4+ / 0-)

  the condition of the Republican Party, let's not forget the propensity of the Democratic Party to fail to capitalize upon it -- as with filibuster reform, or the financial crisis as an opportunity to clean up Wall Street and revitalize the Middle Class, or to set the record straight on Climate Change and the dirty secret of it will actually require to mitigate the worst effects of it.
  Let's not forget that, for that very reason--the Democrats inability to take advantage of a Republican Party in disarray, which is a uninspiring sight indeed--2010 followed 2008.
  

  The Class, Terror and Climate Wars are indivisible and the short-term outcome will affect the planet for centuries. -WiA "When you triangulate everything, you can't even roll downhill..." - PhilJD

  by Words In Action on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 06:37:18 AM PST

Obama Rated at 3-Year High in Poll, Republicans at Bottom

By Mike Dorning - Feb 20, 2013 8:00 PM ET

President Barack Obama enters the latest budget showdown with Congress with his highest job- approval rating in three years and public support for his economic message, while his Republican opponents’ popularity stands at a record low.

Fifty-five percent of Americans approve of Obama’s performance in office, his strongest level of support since September 2009, according to a Bloomberg National poll conducted Feb. 15-18. Only 35 percent of the country has a favorable view of the Republican Party, the lowest rating in a survey that began in September 2009. The party’s brand slipped six percentage points in the last six months, the poll shows. 

  

Feelings toward U.S. President Barack Obam are the most positive since December 2009, with 56 percent of Americans holding a favorable opinion of the president and 40 percent a negative one. Photographer: Andrew Harrer/Bloomberg 

Feb. 19 (Bloomberg) -- President Barack Obama speaks about the need for Congress to avert the automatic $1.2 trillion in budget cuts set to kick in March 1. Obama said if lawmakers can’t agree on a broad deal to replace the across-the-board spending reductions, Congress should “at minimum” pass a temporary, smaller package that provides more time for negotiations. (Source: Bloomberg) 

  Bloomberg News National Poll by   Peggy Satterfield

Americans by 49 percent to 44 percent believe Obama’s proposals for government spending on infrastructure, education and alternative energy are more likely to create jobs than Republican calls to cut spending and taxes to build business confidence and spur employment.

“The Republicans are not offering any new solutions,” said poll respondent Cynthia Synos, 62, a political independent who lives in the St. Louis suburb of Greendale, Missouri. “Their answer is always tax cuts and incentives for business. I’ve never heard them say anything innovative to spark the economy that would help the other 85, 90 percent of people that have to deal with the economy as it is.”
Economic Risks

The findings come as Congress and the White House are trying to reach an agreement to stop $1.2 trillion in automatic cuts in federal spending during the next nine years beginning March 1. The Congressional Budget Office estimates the measures would reduce economic growth by 0.6 percent this year, enough to eliminate 750,000 jobs.

Obama’s positive standing with the public provides him with political leverage as Americans assess blame for any furloughs, disruption of government services or damage to the economy if the spending cuts aren’t averted. The repercussions also could help shape the battleground for the 2014 midterm congressional elections.

Beyond the fiscal showdown, the poll shows traction for the president on immigration, with 47 percent approval of his handling of the issue compared with 38 percent disapproval. Fifty-three percent of Americans support a path to citizenship while 18 percent back a process toward legal status for illegal residents already in the country if certain conditions are met.

Feelings toward Obama are the most positive since December 2009, with 56 percent of Americans holding a favorable opinion of the president and 40 percent a negative one. The Democratic Party he leads is viewed favorably by 47 percent and unfavorably by 43 percent.
Blame Republicans

Public views of congressional Republicans’ record places an added burden on them in the standoff over automatic spending cuts. Americans by 43 percent to 34 percent say they are more to blame than Obama and Democrats for “what’s gone wrong” in Washington. Still, another 23 percent aren’t sure which side bears more responsibility.

Republicans “are not willing to work at all with the president,” said poll respondent Horace Lee Boyd, 64, a political independent and retired wholesale merchandiser who lives in Cullman, Alabama. “When you cease to compromise, you cease to accomplish anything. We’re at a stalemate. He’s willing to compromise and they aren’t.”
Obama Vulnerabilities

The White House has its own vulnerabilities, the poll shows. The public remains discontented with the state of the nation, with 54 percent saying the country is on the wrong track, though that is the lowest portion to say so since September 2009.

Americans also disapprove of Obama’s handling of the federal budget deficit by 55 percent to 35 percent. Political independents disapprove by more than 2-to-1: 61 percent disapprove compared with 26 percent who approve.

“I understand he inherited some of these problems, but he needs to tighten the belt,” said poll respondent Rakesh Sethi, 55, a political independent and natural wellness speaker who lives in San Ramon, California. “You have to live within your means and when you continue go beyond your means it is a recipe for disaster in the long run.”

The CBO projects the federal budget deficit for the fiscal year ending Sept. 30, 2013, will be $845 billion, or 5.3 percent of gross domestic product, down from the prior year’s deficit of $1.1 trillion, or 7 percent of GDP.
Managing Economy

The country is about evenly divided on Obama’s handling of the economy, with 47 percent approving and 49 percent disapproving. His handling of negotiations with congressional Republicans also splits Americans about evenly, with 42 percent approving and 44 percent disapproving.

Independents are more disgruntled. They disapprove of Obama’s handling of the economy 55 percent to 40 percent and disapprove of his approach to negotiating with Republicans by 46 percent to 35 percent.

He does better in the international arena. Fifty-two percent of Americans approve of Obama’s handling of relations with other countries and 59 percent approve of his handling of terrorism.

A majority of Americans are ready to grant legal status to immigrants who arrived in the country illegally.

Thirty-five percent back a path to citizenship “now” for those who don’t have criminal records, have paid taxes, learn English and pay a fine, conditions the Obama administration would impose along with an eight-year waiting period. Eighteen percent would grant them citizenship or legal status once measurable improvements were made in border security, which reflects a bipartisan Senate proposal released last month.
Legal Status

Another 18 percent would grant them legal status, though not citizenship, an idea several Republican senators proposed in the last Congress. Only 23 percent would deny any path to legal status for immigrants who entered the country illegally.

“If you’d like to have a salad for dinner, you need to have someone who is willing to go pick the lettuce,” said poll respondent Pete Cable, a chemist and a Republican who lives in Chapel Hill, North Carolina. “Most of the illegal immigrants who are here are working. They are providing a valuable service. They should be allowed to become citizens.”

In distributing work visas to new immigrants, Americans would look to employment skills and family ties. Twenty-nine percent say high-skill workers such as engineers should get top priority for additional visas, while 24 percent say first dibs should go to immigrants who are reuniting with families. Fifteen percent would put farm workers at the front of the line and 14 percent low-skill workers, such as construction and hotel employees.

The poll of 1,003 U.S. adults was conducted by Selzer & Co., a Des Moines, Iowa based polling firm, and has a margin of error of 3.1 percentage points.

Majority of U.S. citizens say illegal immigrants should be deported


Q: Do you favor or oppose creating a way for illegal immigrants already here to become citizens if they meet certain requirements?

A group of recently deported immigrants stand near the double steel fence that separates San Diego and Tijuana at the border in Tijuana December 10, 2011. Credit: Reuters/Jorge Duenes



By Rachelle Younglai

WASHINGTON | Wed Feb 20, 2013 8:09pm EST

(Reuters) - More than half of U.S. citizens believe that most or all of the country's 11 million illegal immigrants should be deported, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll released on Wednesday that highlights the difficulties facing lawmakers trying to reform the U.S. immigration system.

The online survey shows resistance to easing immigration laws despite the biggest push for reform in Congress since 2007.

Thirty percent of those polled think that most illegal immigrants, with some exceptions, should be deported, while 23 percent believe all illegal immigrants should be deported.

Only 5 percent believe all illegal immigrants should be allowed to stay in the United States legally, and 31 percent want most illegal immigrants to stay.

These results are in line with other polls in recent years, suggesting that people's views on immigration have not changed dramatically since the immigration debate reignited in Congress last month, according to Ipsos pollster Julia Clark.

"It's not Americans' views that are shifting. It is that the political climate is ripe for this discussion," after the November election when Hispanics voted overwhelmingly in favor of Democratic President Barack Obama, she said.

"Democrats feel that the time is right to capitalize on their wins and Republicans feel that they had a bad blow and are eager to reach out to Hispanics," she added.

Polls show that most Americans back immigration reform, although they often have different ideas of what that means, with some people favoring looser immigration laws while others want to see greater border security.

A group of eight U.S. senators are working on a bipartisan deal to enact immigration reform, the first major attempt since a similar overhaul died in Congress six years ago.

The senators' proposal calls for a full path to citizenship for illegal immigrants once they pay back taxes and a fine and wait in line behind others applying to become Americans.

A plan by Obama has similar provisions, but the senators want any move to relax immigration laws dependant on boosting security on the southern border.

ISSUE POLARIZES POLICYMAKERS

Attitudes toward immigration are polarized by party, according to another the Reuters/Ipsos poll. Seventy-five percent of Republicans think all or most immigrants should be deported, compared to 40 percent of Democrats who think the same.

Republican Senator John McCain, one of the eight senators in the group, had his own encounter with citizens angered by illegal immigration on Tuesday when residents of his state of Arizona complained bitterly at a town hall meeting about the lack of security on the border with Mexico.

One man asked why troops had not been deployed to the border.

"Why didn't the army go down there and stop them? Because the only thing that stops them I'm afraid to say, and it's too damn bad, is a gun," the man said,

Another resident, Keith Smith, got into a testy exchange with McCain, the 2008 Republican presidential candidate whose views on immigration have fluctuated over the years.

"Cut off their welfare and all their stuff and they'll go back," Smith said, referring to undocumented workers.

McCain had been trying to explain his position: "You're not telling these people the truth. They mow our lawns, they care for our babies, they clean . . . that's what those people do," he said.

The Arizona lawmaker, whose position on immigration hardened during the 2010 midterm elections before softening again, is a key part of the Republican side of the senators' bipartisan immigration effort.

Wednesday's Reuters/Ipsos poll was conducted Friday through Tuesday and surveyed 1,443 Americans over the age of 18.

The precision of the Reuters/Ipsos online poll is measured using a credibility interval. In this survey, the poll has a credibility interval of plus or minus 2.9 percentage points.

(Reporting by Rachelle Younglai in Washington and Tim Gaynor in Phoenix, Editing by Alistair Bell and Philip Barbara)

PUBLIC POLLING ON IMMIGRATION REFORM

POLL: February 2013–Washington Post

• 70% of all voters support creating a path to citizenship for the undocumented. Asked if they favored “creating a way for illegal immigrants already here to become citizens,” 70% of voters agreed that they favored the proposal.

• 60% of Republicans support a path to citizenship on the merits. 60% of Republicans said they favored “creating a way” for the undocumented to become citizens.

• 59% of all voters — including 61% of independents — supported a path to citizenship when it was identified as a proposal from President Obama. When told that “Obama has proposed” a path to citizenship, 59% of all voters said they agreed with the proposal, including 61% of independents. However, only 39% of Republicans agreed with the proposal when it was identified with President Obama — a 21-point drop from their support for citizenship on the merits.

From January 31st-February 10th, 2013, the Washington Post conducted a poll of 1,775 adults. 875 were asked about a path to citizenship on the merits and 900 were asked whether they disagreed with “Obama’s proposal.” The margin of error for the poll is +/-4%.

 

Even as the economic outlook brightens a bit, Americans' view of the nation's future, its leaders and its fundamental promise have darkened.

Susan Page, USA TODAY9:14a.m. EST January 2, 2013

(Photo: Stephanie M Strasburg for USA TODAY)

Story Highlights

• Mood of America shows subdued expectations heading into new year
• Three in four say politics is seriously harming the country
• USA TODAY/Gallup Poll finds public divided about Obama, united in disdain for Congress

PITTSBURGH — Remember that wave of optimism and good feeling that typically greets a presidential inauguration, not to mention a new year?

This time, it's hard to find.

Battered by an economy that is only slow recovering — and soured by the spectacle of Washington dysfunction in the "fiscal cliff" debate — views of the nation's future and its fundamental promise have darkened in the four years since Barack Obama's first inauguration.

Then, even during an unfolding financial crisis, Americans believed by a double-digit margin that it was likely young people would have a better life than their parents, one facet of the classic American dream. Now, a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll finds they're narrowly inclined to say that's not likely. By 50%-47%, respondents say the country's best years are behind us.

"I'm pessimistic about where the country is and where it's going," says Rick Rogoff, 55, the owner of a small food-service company here, ticking off the reasons why. "From the cost of living to the quality of health care to inflation to the politics of the country — the partisanship, it's endless. I'm not really a pessimist. I'm a realist. I look at the situation and it's hard to find things that are good."

Even those with a more upbeat perspective sound less than confident. "I'm optimistic," Tamera Bryant, 39, the auditor for a non-profit organization, says of Obama's next four years, "but I think it's going to be a fight."

Call us weary and wary.

In the new poll, more than three of four Americans say the way politics works in Washington is causing serious harm to the country.Results from the nationwide poll and interviews in this Ohio River Valley city, which counts George Washington among its founders, underscore the rocky road Obama and other officials face in convincing Americans the nation can address its most persistent problems — and that they can be trusted to lead the way.

At a roundtable discussion in Pittsburgh and in follow-up interviews, the mood was subdued. Rogoff and Bryant were among 11 local residents with divergent points of view who met to discuss the prospects ahead for the president and the nation. Near the end of the evening, five raise their hands to say the nation's best days are ahead. The other six say the best days for the United States already have passed.

Over the past few years, some have seen job layoffs in their families and neighbors facing home foreclosures. Others worry that deficit spending, government regulations and the health care overhaul law are eroding individual freedoms. Last month's shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., shadowed their thoughts and the holidays.

They are divided about Obama but united in their disdain for Congress and Washington. By 4-1, Americans disapprove of the way Congress is handling its job. The perils-of-Pauline negotiations over the year-end budget and tax negotiations dubbed the fiscal cliff have fueled the sense that the government no longer functions as it should.

"I just wish the politicians would be unified for what's the good of the country, instead of the special interests and the partisanship and the party line. Just do what's right for the people of this country," Rogoff says. "We'd be unstoppable. But it seems like we've gone over the cliff on that."

"If they could work together, they could get more stuff done," Diana Jackson, 47, a customer-service representative, agrees. "I also think like this: We voted them in so they could do a job. If I didn't do my job, I'd get fired. Why can't they be accountable for not doing their job? They've forgotten why they're there."

Heads nod around the table.

Not-so-great expectations

The stratospheric expectations that surrounded Obama's groundbreaking election in 2008 have fallen back to Earth — not to dismal levels, but to decidedly lower ones.

Then, two-thirds in a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll said they were "optimistic" and "proud" in reaction to Obama's election; now, about half cite those emotions in response to his re-election. Then, six in 10 were "excited"; now, four in 10 feel that way.

Negative reactions run higher now. Three in 10 were "pessimistic" in response to his election four years ago; now 43% are. Then, 27% described their response as "afraid"; that number has jumped to 36%.

The poll of 1,025 adults taken Dec. 14-17 has a margin of error of +/– 4 percentage points.

Perspectives on Obama spark the most impassioned exchanges of the roundtable discussion. In the group, five had voted for Obama and five for Republican Mitt Romney; one had backed Green Party nominee Jill Stein.

"He's doing the best he can with what he's got," Jackson says of Obama. Michelle Stearns, 44, a social worker, wonders whether the friction between the political parties "is just people being prejudiced." At school, she says, her children hear "horrible racial slurs" against the president. She asks: "If Obama had been white, how would this have gone?"

Jennifer Majcher, 44, a stay-at-home mom and supporter of the Tea Party movement, counters heatedly that opposition to Obama has nothing to do with racial prejudice and everything to do with opposition to the policies he has pursued.

"He spent his way through everything," she says. "He pushed through everything he wanted and blamed (George W.) Bush for everything. I'm frustrated that people are blind to all the damage he has caused this country."

Asked to describe in a word or two what Obama's second term will be like, Majcher and Rogoff say "more of the same." The other Romney voters use similar language. Matt Gailey, a 33-year-old lawyer, says "depressing" and Dan Davis, 27, who works in a bank, says "disappointing." Armend Engelbrecht, 31, the owner of an auto mechanic firm, predicts "a dismal failure for the country."

Jim Pierce, 48, a real estate manager, talks during a focus group of 11 middle-class people from Pittsburgh. "I can see that people are having trouble," says Pierce of the tenants who rent from his real estate company.(Photo: Stephanie M Strasburg for USA TODAY)


Among the Obama voters, the optimism of four years ago has been tempered. Kimberly Gillis, 42, a high-school English teacher, says it will be "positive" and Stearns struggles to find a word, then settles on "interesting." Jackson predicts a "tug of war." Jim Pierce, 48, who manages housing units, expects a "stalemate."

Karl Greenley, 34, a tech consultant who voted for the Green Party candidate for president, thinks the next four years will be "fraught with conflict."

Americans do see Obama's re-election as being consequential. In the USA TODAY poll, half say the fact he won the White House rather than Romney will make a great deal of difference to the future of the country. Just one in five say his election will make not much or no difference.

By 3-1, those surveyed predict that, in the next four years, Obama will be more liberal rather than more conservative than he was in his first term. There is wariness about the impact his second-term policies will have: 35% predict they will make their own financial situations better; 42% say they will make them worse.

And nearly three years after he signed his signature achievement into law, the president has yet to convince most Americans that the Affordable Care Act will prove to be a positive for them and their families. Four in 10 say the law designed to expand health coverage will make things worse; three in 10 say it will make things better.

Just 12% predict the law will make things for them "a lot better." Nearly twice as many, 21%, say it will make things "a lot worse."

In the roundtable, there is uncertainty and concern about what the provisions of the law will mean when fully implemented. "Obamacare is going to bankrupt us all," says Gailey, who calls the law unsustainable and complains that the United States is becoming more like the social welfare states of Europe.

Majcher worries the programs that have helped cover services for her 8-and 11-year-old sons, wh

o have attention-deficit and anxiety disorders, may be curtailed as a result of the law. "The government has been there for my children, but I'm a little worried what is going to happen," she says. "Is this all going to change?"

President Obama walks on the South Lawn as he leaves the White House on Tuesday to return to Hawaii for a family vacation.(Photo: Charles Dharapak, AP)


Is that a light?

Americans do see a flicker of light at the end what has been a long tunnel.

Four years ago, just 13% of Americans said they were satisfied with the way things were going in the USA. At the time, financial institutions from big banks to the auto industry were in crisis as the economic contracted and unemployment soared. Now, 23% express satisfaction with the country's course — still significantly lower than when previous recent presidents took office for their second terms. For Bush in 2005, 45% were satisfied; for Bill Clinton in 1997, 43%; for Ronald Reagan in 1985, 52%.

Memories of the economic travails of the past few years are fresh. Jackson was laid off when her employer decided to contract out customer services; after five weeks the new firm hired her back but with less generous health care coverage and no 401(k) retirement plan. Pierce has watched as the low- and moderate-income families in housing units he manages struggle, "affording less, living on shoe strings, eating ramen" noodles.

In the poll, more than a third say either they or one of their closest family members have suffered a "major financial setback" in the past year; just one in five report a major financial gain in their family. While the economy, in fact, is growing again — the recession officially ended in June 2009 — just a third of Americans see it that way. They're outnumbered by the 44% who say it's in a recession or a depression.

There is more optimism when Americans consider their own families and their personal lives. They are inclined to say they and their families are better off rather than worse off than they were one year ago. Looking ahead, by an overwhelming 69%-27%, they are optimistic about how their family will fare in 2013.

"I see what seems to be an improvement in housing and the real-estate industry, and overall I think there have been more jobs," Stearns says. "There for a while, I know at my husband's job, they weren't doing raises; they were cutting everything. All of a sudden, in the past year or two, things have gotten better for them."

Still, predictions for the nation in 2013 are almost all downbeat.

By 2-1, those surveyed expect this year to be one of economic difficulty, not one of prosperity. A majority say employment will improve and inflation will be under control. But more than eight in 10 also say taxes and the crime rate will rise. Three of four predict a "troubled year" of international discord, not a peaceful one. Most believe American power around the globe will decline.

Last month's mass shooting in Newtown has reinforced a sense that the nation has gotten off-track in ways that seem beyond anyone's ability to remedy.

At the roundtable discussion, asked what has gotten worse about the country since they were growing up, Bryan offers: "Kids shooting kids."

"This country has way too many deaths attributed to weapons, to guns, like no other country in the world," Rogoff says in a follow-up interview. The shock of the Connecticut shootings has the National Rifle Association "running a little scared" at the moment, but he says experience suggests that won't last. "Long-term, the people have short memories."

In addition to doing more to control assault-style weapons and high-capacity magazines, Greenley says the government should fund and mandate safety training for gun owners, similar to that required to get a driver's license. But he doubts that or much else will happen. "The reaction so far seems like a lot of spinning wheels," he says.

Kerry: Foreign aid is in America's self-interest

NBC's Mark Murray and Domenico Montanaro note there is no movement toward a compromise to avert the sequester's deep domestic and defense cuts. Right now, it's all about the blame game.

By Tom Curry, National Affairs Writer, NBC News

In his first major address since taking office three weeks ago, Secretary of State John Kerry told an audience at the University of Virginia Wednesday that Americans must invest more in foreign aid and diplomacy in order to protect U.S. security and to cultivate American prosperity.

“Deploying diplomats today is much cheaper than deploying troops tomorrow,” he told an audience of students and others. He noted that he was speaking at a university founded by the very first secretary of state, Thomas Jefferson, who also served as American ambassador to France.

“Foreign assistance is not a giveaway. It’s not charity.  It is an investment in a strong America and free world,” Kerry said.

Recommended: What happens if the sequester sky doesn't fall?

The former Massachusetts senator, who was the Democratic presidential nominee in 2004, noted that “our whole foreign policy budget is just over one percent of our national budget. Think about it a bit: over one percent, a little bit more,  funds all of our civilian and foreign affairs efforts -- every embassy, every program that saves a child form dirty drinking water or from AIDS, (or) that reaches out to build a village and bring America’s value.” 

Steve Helber / AP

Secretary of State John Kerry gestures as he delivers his first foreign policy speech, Wednesday, Feb. 20, in Old Cabel Hall at the University of Virginia in Charlottesville, Va.

Kerry said that not spending U.S. taxpayer dollars on foreign aid and diplomacy would leave a vacuum that would “quickly be filled by those whose interests differ dramatically from ours. We learned that lesson in the deserts of Mali recently, in the mountains of Afghanistan in 2001, and in the tribal areas of Pakistan even today.”

Kerry argued that foreign aid need not mean poorer nations being permanent dependents of the U.S. taxpayer. “Eleven of our top 15 trading partners used to be the beneficiaries of U.S. foreign assistance,” he said. “That's because our goal isn't to keep a nation dependent on us forever. It’s precisely to create these markets, to open these opportunities, to establish rule of law. Our goal is to use assistance and development to help nations realize their own potential … and become our economic partners.”

Secretary of State John Kerry delivers his first major address since taking over for Hillary Clinton.

Kerry emphasized the role of the State Department and American embassies in drumming up business for U.S. corporations, citing, for example, the American embassy in Jakarta for helping secure “an order for commercial aircraft – the largest order Boeing has ever been asked to fill.  Meanwhile, the Indonesian state railroad is buying its locomotives from GE.”

Recommended: McCain faces backlash at home over immigration issue

He also argued that the United States must join with other nations to reduce the threat of nuclear weapons and “build partnerships” so that “we don't have to fight these battles alone. This includes working with our partners around the world in making sure Iran never obtains a weapon that would endanger our allies and our interests.”

He did not mention in his speech the continuing civil war and refugee crisis in Syria. Kerry and President Barack Obama are under pressure from a bipartisan group of senators to do more, including establishing an no-fly zone over Syria, in order to protect rebels from the armed forces of President Bashar al-Assad.

Boston's sandal-wearing Cardinal O'Malley getting papal buzz

AFP - Getty Images file

Boston Cardinal Sean O'Malley, shown here at a 2009 press conference, is generating buzz ahead of the papal conclave in Rome.

By Tracy Connor, Staff Writer, NBC News

Boston Cardinal Sean O'Malley is generating buzz in Rome as a possible contender to be the next pope, even though Vatican watchers have long said an American pontiff is a longshot.

John L. Allen, a columnist for the National Catholic Reporter, took note this week of the growing number of Italian newspapers and commentators who have mentioned O'Malley as a candidate or written favorably about his cleanup of the archdiocese's sex-abuse scandal.

"Right now, it's tough for an American journalist to walk into the Vatican Press Office without fielding questions from colleagues about him," Allen wrote.

O'Malley -- a distinctive figure in the monkish brown cassock of the Capuchin religious order -- isn't entertaining questions about his chances of succeeding Pope Benedict XVI when the College of Cardinals convenes.

"As the Cardinal said last week at his press conference, he has a round trip ticket to return home and will rely on the guidance and wisdom of the Holy Spirit as the College of Cardinals enter the conclave in March," spokeswoman Kellyanne Dignan said.

O'Malley, 68, was named archbishop of Boston in 2003, after Cardinal Bernard Law stepped down amid allegations he covered up sex abuse by priests. He was elevated to cardinal three years later. 

Thomas Groome, a theology professor at Boston College, said that of all the American bishops who've had to deal with the abuse crisis, O'Malley "has come closest to satisfying the victims." He sold the archdiocese's palatial headquarters and used the money for victim settlements.

A low-key personality who prizes simplicity and "isn't a hardened idealogue," O'Malley would bring a starkly different style to the papacy, Groome said.

"We'd go from Prada booties to sandals and no socks," he said. "He wouldn't be a blustering public personality like John Paul. You'd have to go back to John XXIII to find someone analogous."

Groome said that when O'Malley's name surfaced he initially laughed it off but now thinks he could emerge as the next pope from a brokered conclave where the cardinals from the northern and southern hemispheres square off.

Franco Origlia / Getty Images file

Cardinal Sean Patrick O'Malley, archbishop of Boston, attends a concistory held by Pope Benedict at Saint Peter's Basilica on November 24, 2012, in Vatican City, Vatican.

"There are 117 cardinals and probably 116 of them would love to be pope," he said. "The one who wouldn't is O'Malley and that could be why he gets it."

Rocco Palmo, who writes the popular Whispers in the Loggia blog, noted that O'Malley heads the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops' high-profile pro-life committee, giving him exposure outside his Boston archdiocese.

But he said it's way too soon to say he's on a short-list.

"It's a wide open field, and anything is possible," Palmo said. "But there are 117 voting cardinals and in the next 25 days, I expect to hear every one of those cardinals' names mentioned."

O'Malley is no Vatican insider and some will question whether he has the managerial mettle to accomplish a much-needed overhaul of its sprawling bureaucracy. And there's never been a pope from the Capuchin order of friars, who are noted for their service to the poor. 

It's been conventional wisdom that American cardinals have little chance of being the pope because of a global phobia of a U.S.-dominated Vatican. Allen says that may have changed because the country's superpower status has dimmed over the decades.

"The Americans have the second-largest voting bloc -- 11 -- after the Italians," Palmo said. "It's only natural an American name is going to appear at some point."

Previously, New York Cardinal Timothy Dolan was mentioned by many as America's top papal possibility. He says those predictions are off-base.

“Those are only from people smoking marijuana,” Dolan said Sunday at St. Patrick's Cathedral.

Slideshow: The life of Pope Benedict XVI

Javier Barbancho / AFP - Getty Images

Joseph Ratzinger became Pope Benedict XVI in 2005. Look back at his life from childhood through his papacy.