Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Tapping the common sense on immigration

This article is part of a series that reveals the many issues and policies on which Republican and Democratic voters agree, but which the federal government has often failed to enact.

Tapping the common sense on immigration

A bank card left behind by migrants turning themselves over to U.S Border Patrol agents along the U.S.-Mexico border at the height of the tensions surrounding the expiration of Title 42.

Getty Images

Kull is Program Director of the Program for Public Consultation.

Lewitus is a Research Analyst at Voice of the People whose research interests focus on policy, public opinion and democracy reform.


Thomas is Vice President of Voice of the People and Director of Voice of the People Action. Thomas is an organizer and government relations professional with years of experience working in campaigns, advocacy, and policy research.

As we know all too well, the federal government has failed to address many problems facing our nation, largely due to increasing partisan polarization that results in near-constant gridlock. Some speculate this polarization is a reflection of the American public. However, what we have found in our public opinion research is that majorities of Republicans and Democrats actually agree on numerous policies – nearly 200 common ground proposals.

One of the most contentious areas of partisan head-butting in Congress over the last decade has been national immigration policy. In the national debate, each side has seemingly opposite and mutually exclusive priorities and solutions. Among the public, however, the story is quite different. There is substantial bipartisan agreement on a number of major proposals.

There are currently around 11 million undocumented immigrants living, and often working, in the U.S. Not since 1986 under President Reagan has the U.S. provided a path to citizenship to such people. In 2013, another major effort was made, when a bipartisan group of Congresspeople introduced a bill that would provide a path to citizenship to most undocumented people. Due to the usual Congressional gridlock, it never even received a vote in the House despite passing in the Senate. This proposal is popular among the public. A bipartisan majority of 74% support a path to citizenship for undocumented persons who do not have a criminal record and have been here for several years, including 55% of Republicans and 92% of Democrats. Pew Research Center’s 2020 poll on the same proposal found nearly identical results: 75% in support nationally, including 57% of Republicans and 89% of Democrats.

Providing a path to citizenship to those brought to the U.S. illegally as children, also known as Dreamers, is favored by an even larger bipartisan majority of eight-in-ten, including 69% of Republicans and 92% of Democrats. This proposal has had the backing of both Republican and Democratic Congresspeople, and has passed the House with bipartisan support, but did not get a vote in the Senate. Pew Research Center found similar bipartisan support.

How to reduce the number of illegal entries into the U.S. has been one of the most animated sources of disagreement between the parties. Proposals that focus on border security do not get partisan agreement among the public. Building a border wall is opposed by a majority (59%), including 85% of Democrats, but a majority of Republicans favor it (74%). When it comes to funding for border security in general, standard polling has found a majority of 53% believe we are spending too little, including 85% of Republicans, but a large majority of Democrats said we’re spending about the right amount or too much. ( AP-NORC poll, March 2023)

However, other proposals that aim to reduce illegal entries do get bipartisan support. Many people enter the U.S. seeking work and many U.S. companies seek out migrant labor. Requiring employers to run checks on all current and future employees to ensure they are legally able to work in the U.S., using the E-Verify system already in place, is supported by a bipartisan 73% (Republicans 80%, Democrats 68%). The 2013 effort at immigration reform also included this E-Verify mandate. Legislation since then has included this proposal, but has never received a vote as a stand-alone proposal.

Bringing more undocumented workers into the legal system has been another proposed strategy to reduce the number of people who are undocumented in the U.S. By better matching the number of work visas to the demand for labor, the argument goes, employers will be able to legally hire more migrants for jobs that most citizens do not want, many of which are seasonal. A bipartisan 69% support tripling the number of temporary non-farm work visas (Republicans 73%, Democrats 67%). Bipartisan majorities also support more general proposals to increase the number of visas for lower-skilled labor (National 77%, Republicans 66%, Democrats 87%), and for higher-skilled labor (National 80%, Republicans 72%, Democrats 86%).

The surveys used for this research differ from standard polls in that they provide respondents with background information and pro-con arguments, before they give their recommendation on a concrete policy tied to real legislation or executive action. These surveys come from the Program for Public Consultation at the University of Maryland, and the Deliberative Democracy Lab at Stanford University. A full list of common ground policies has been compiled as part of Voice of the People’s Common Ground of the American People project.

Read More

news app
New platforms help overcome biased news reporting
Tero Vesalainen/Getty Images

The Selective Sanctity of Death: When Empathy Depends on Skin Color

Rampant calls to avoid sharing the video of Charlie Kirk’s death have been swift and emphatic across social media. “We need to keep our souls clean,” journalists plead. “Where are social media’s content moderators?” “How did we get so desensitized?” The moral outrage is palpable; the demands for human dignity urgent and clear.

But as a Black woman who has been forced to witness the constant virality of Black death, I must ask: where was this widespread anger for George Floyd? For Philando Castile? For Daunte Wright? For Tyre Nichols?

Keep ReadingShow less
Following Jefferson: Promoting Inter-Generational Understanding Through Constitution-Making
Mount Rushmore
Photo by John Bakator on Unsplash

Following Jefferson: Promoting Inter-Generational Understanding Through Constitution-Making

No one can denounce the New York Yankee fan for boasting that her favorite ballclub has won more World Series championships than any other. At 27 titles, the Bronx Bombers claim more than twice their closest competitor.

No one can question admirers of the late, great Chick Corea, or the equally astonishing Alison Krauss, for their virtually unrivaled Grammy victories. At 27 gold statues, only Beyoncé and Quincy Jones have more in the popular categories.

Keep ReadingShow less
A close up of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement badge.

Trump’s mass deportations promise security but deliver economic pain, family separation, and chaos. Here’s why this policy is failing America.

Getty Images, Tennessee Witney

The Cruel Arithmetic of Trump’s Immigration Crackdown

As summer 2025 winds down, the Trump administration’s deportation machine is operating at full throttle—removing over one million people in six months and fulfilling a campaign promise to launch the “largest deportation operation in American history.” For supporters, this is a victory lap for law and order. For the rest of the lot, it’s a costly illusion—one that trades complexity for spectacle and security for chaos.

Let’s dispense with the fantasy first. The administration insists that mass deportations will save billions, reduce crime, and protect American jobs. But like most political magic tricks, the numbers vanish under scrutiny. The Economic Policy Institute warns that this policy could destroy millions of jobs—not just for immigrants but for U.S.-born workers in sectors like construction, elder care, and child care. That’s not just a fiscal cliff—it is fewer teachers, fewer caregivers, and fewer homes built. It is inflation with a human face. In fact, child care alone could shrink by over 15%, leaving working parents stranded and employers scrambling.

Meanwhile, the Peterson Institute projects a drop in GDP and employment, while the Penn Wharton School’s Budget Model estimates that deporting unauthorized workers over a decade would slash Social Security revenue and inflate deficits by nearly $900 billion. That’s not a typo. It’s a fiscal cliff dressed up as border security.

And then there’s food. Deporting farmworkers doesn’t just leave fields fallow—it drives up prices. Analysts predict a 10% spike in food costs, compounding inflation and squeezing families already living paycheck to paycheck. In California, where immigrant renters are disproportionately affected, eviction rates are climbing. The Urban Institute warns that deportations are deepening the housing crisis by gutting the construction workforce. So much for protecting American livelihoods.

But the real cost isn’t measured in dollars. It’s measured in broken families, empty classrooms, and quiet despair. The administration has deployed 10,000 armed service members to the border and ramped up “self-deportation” tactics—policies so harsh they force people to leave voluntarily. The result: Children skipping meals because their parents fear applying for food assistance; Cancer patients deported mid-treatment; and LGBTQ+ youth losing access to mental health care. The Human Rights Watch calls it a “crueler world for immigrants.” That’s putting it mildly.

This isn’t targeted enforcement. It’s a dragnet. Green card holders, long-term residents, and asylum seekers are swept up alongside undocumented workers. Viral videos show ICE raids at schools, hospitals, and churches. Lawsuits are piling up. And the chilling effect is real: immigrant communities are retreating from public life, afraid to report crimes or seek help. That’s not safety. That’s silence. Legal scholars warn that the administration’s tactics—raids at schools, churches, and hospitals—may violate Fourth Amendment protections and due process norms.

Even the administration’s security claims are shaky. Yes, border crossings are down—by about 60%, thanks to policies like “Remain in Mexico.” But deportation numbers haven’t met the promised scale. The Migration Policy Institute notes that monthly averages hover around 14,500, far below the millions touted. And the root causes of undocumented immigration—like visa overstays, which account for 60% of cases—remain untouched.

Crime reduction? Also murky. FBI data shows declines in some areas, but experts attribute this more to economic trends than immigration enforcement. In fact, fear in immigrant communities may be making things worse. When people won’t talk to the police, crimes go unreported. That’s not justice. That’s dysfunction.

Public opinion is catching up. In February, 59% of Americans supported mass deportations. By July, that number had cratered. Gallup reports a 25-point drop in favor of immigration cuts. The Pew Research Center finds that 75% of Democrats—and a growing number of independents—think the policy goes too far. Even Trump-friendly voices like Joe Rogan are balking, calling raids on “construction workers and gardeners” a betrayal of common sense.

On social media, the backlash is swift. Users on X (formerly Twitter) call the policy “ineffective,” “manipulative,” and “theater.” And they’re not wrong. This isn’t about solving immigration. It’s about staging a show—one where fear plays the villain and facts are the understudy.

The White House insists this is what voters wanted. But a narrow electoral win isn’t a blank check for policies that harm the economy and fray the social fabric. Alternatives exist: Targeted enforcement focused on violent offenders; visa reform to address overstays; and legal pathways to fill labor gaps. These aren’t radical ideas—they’re pragmatic ones. And they don’t require tearing families apart to work.

Trump’s deportation blitz is a mirage. It promises safety but delivers instability. It claims to protect jobs but undermines the very sectors that keep the country running. It speaks the language of law and order but acts with the recklessness of a demolition crew. Alternatives exist—and they work. Cities that focus on community policing and legal pathways report higher public safety and stronger economies. Reform doesn’t require cruelty. It requires courage.

Keep ReadingShow less
Multi-colored speech bubbles overlapping.

Stanford’s Strengthening Democracy Challenge shows a key way to reduce political violence: reveal that most Americans reject it.

Getty Images, MirageC

In the Aftermath of Assassinations, Let’s Show That Americans Overwhelmingly Disapprove of Political Violence

In the aftermath of Charlie Kirk’s assassination—and the assassination of Minnesota state legislator Melissa Hortman only three months ago—questions inevitably arise about how to reduce the likelihood of similar heinous actions.

Results from arguably the most important study focused on the U.S. context, the Strengthening Democracy Challenge run by Stanford University, point to one straightforward answer: show people that very few in the other party support political violence. This approach has been shown to reduce support for political violence.

Keep ReadingShow less