Washed It!

Repeated clashes over illegal immigration have marked the state’s political races for years, but a new Los Angeles Times/USC poll found that voters hold positive views about immigrants overall and favor accommodating illegal immigrants who have held down jobs in the state.

Asked whether immigrants represented a benefit or a burden to the state, 48% of voters likely to cast ballots in November said they were a benefit, and 36% said they strongly held that view. Only 32% said immigrants overall were a burden to California because of their impact on public services, and only 22% felt that way strongly.

Separately, 59% of likely voters said that an illegal immigrant who had lived and worked in the United States for at least two years should be allowed to remain here if discovered. More than 2 in 5 voters saidthey felt strongly that such an option should be available. Only 30% of likely voters thought the illegal immigrant should be deported, and only 19% backed that option strongly.

But views varied widely by political persuasion and age.

Liberals were most supportive of immigrants legal and illegal, with 75% saying immigrants were a benefit and 81% saying that working illegal immigrants should be able to keep their jobs. Voters under 45 agreed, with 59% saying immigrants were beneficial and 68% calling for illegal immigrants to keep their jobs rather than be deported.

Among conservative likely voters, 52% felt immigrants were a burden and 25% felt they were a benefit. Conservatives were the only group that leaned more toward deportation — by a narrow 2 percentage point margin.

Voters over 65 were more split, with 41% citing immigrants as a benefit and 36% as a burden. They also favored letting illegal immigrants keep their jobs, 55% to 33%.

By far the demographic group most supportive of immigrants was Latinos. Sixty-eight percent said immigrants were a benefit, a view shared by 43% of whites. And 76% felt illegal immigrants should be allowed to stay in the country, a sentiment shared by 56% of whites.

The poll was conducted for The Los Angeles Times and the USC College of Letters, Arts and Sciences from Oct. 13 to 20 by the Democratic polling firm Greenberg Quinlan Rosner and the Republican firm American Viewpoint. It included a random sample of 1,501 California voters, including 922 likely voters. Results for likely voters have a margin of sampling error of 3.2 points in either direction, with a larger margin for subgroups.

cathleen.decker@latimes.com
Californians hold positive views of immigrants; most oppose deportation

WASHINGTON — Overcoming months of gridlock, the Senate approved a small-business bill on Thursday that handed President Obama an election-year victory but showed just how difficult it had become for lawmakers to agree on the best way to help the sluggish economy and create jobs.

The measure passed by a 61-38 vote, with just two Republicans crossing party lines to support the bill, which would create a $30-billion small-business lending fund and provide $12 billion in tax breaks to help companies invest and hire. The bill now heads to the House, where it is expected to pass swiftly.

Yet the months-long impasse over the bill to aid small businesses, which have been hard hit during the economic downturn and are championed by both parties as engines of the recovery, highlights the partisan divisions before the fall midterm election.

“It tells you the depth of the gridlock and dysfunction that unfortunately has gripped the Congress,” said Sen. Evan Bayh (D- Ind.). “Hopefully, some of that will abate after the election.”

The bill enjoyed bipartisan support at the outset, but the addition of the $30-billion small-business lending fund to give credit-starved firms access to capital created insurmountable partisan divisions.
Republicans quickly opposed the lending fund as a “mini-TARP” — reminding voters of the unpopular Troubled Assets Relief Program that was the cornerstone of the 2008 federal bank bailout.

Republicans filibustered in July, demanding the chance to offer more amendments — including those unrelated to the legislation. Democrats shelved the bill as the debate dragged on and other legislation took priority.

Those expected to champion the bill from the business community — the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Federation of Independent Businesses — instead focused on using the legislation as a vehicle to overturn an onerous business reporting requirement in the new healthcare law.

“All of a sudden it became a partisan exercise again,” said Sen. Orrin Hatch (R- Utah). “It’s amazing to me how difficult it is to work together around here, even when we want to. It’s almost like an arrogance of power: We’re going to teach those Republicans.”

Republican Sen. George LeMieux of Florida and Sen. George Voinovich of Ohio, neither of whom are seeking re-election, joined 57 Democrats and two independents to pass the measure.

The House passed a version of the bill earlier this year, and at one point over the summer, frustrated House lawmakers walked across the Capitol to stage a quiet sit-in at the Senate chamber to protest the delays on this and other jobs bills.

“While I am grateful for this progress, it should not have taken this long to pass this bill,” Obama said on the eve of Senate action. He has promised to sign the legislation quickly.

The bill offers $12 billion in tax breaks to businesses to encourage investment, entrepreneurship and hiring.

Businesses also would be able to write off more of their costs of buying equipment or making shop improvements. Those who are self-employed could deduct healthcare costs from the self-employment tax. The bill would also continue to waive Small Business Administration loan fees that had been cut as part of the 2009 recovery package.

The $15-billion cost of the bill is offset by closing tax loopholes and increasing tax-reporting requirements and penalties.

Democrats estimate the legislation could create 500,000 jobs.

Amendments earlier in the week sought to lift a much-criticized healthcare tax reporting requirement that both Democrats and Republicans agree needs to be fixed. But the amendments failed as senators could not agree on a way to recoup the $17 billion in revenue that would be lost by doing away with the provision.

Republicans also made two procedural moves on Thursday to attach tax credits for research and development and biodiesel development, but both were rejected.

lmascaro@tribune.com
Senate approves Obama’s small-business aid package

Pressure on President Obama to do something about the weakening economy intensified Friday with new government data showing that hiring remains lackluster, nudging the nation’s unemployment rate up to 9.6%.

With congressional elections less than eight weeks away, Obama appeared in the Rose Garden to say that he would soon propose a new package of tax cuts and other incentives to spur employment.

“We are confident that we are moving in the right direction, but we want to keep this recovery moving stronger and accelerate the job growth that’s needed so desperately,” the president said.

Obama spoke after the Labor Department reported that the nation lost 54,000 net jobs in August, fewer than economists had expected but still dismal. The private sector’s weak gain of 67,000 jobs was wiped out largely by the number of federal census jobs that ended.

The unemployment rate edged up to 9.6% from 9.5% in July, the first increase in that figure since April.

The president is expected to use a speech in Cleveland on Wednesday to outline a series of measures to kick-start the economy, which could include extending research and development tax credits for business, increasing spending on highways and other public works projects, and retaining the middle-class portion of the Bush administration tax cuts that are set to expire at the end of the year.

Many analysts believe that those measures will have only a modest effect, especially in the short time remaining before the midterm elections. But with Republicans lined up solidly against the Democratic administration on economic policy, more far-reaching proposals are considered out of the question.

“The key will be whether it’s smart — getting bang for the buck — and if it’s big enough,” said Heidi Shierholz, an economist at the nonprofit Economic Policy Institute, a liberal-leaning research group in Washington. “And I’m concerned on both of those fronts.”

One idea that has received some support from Republicans is a three-month payroll tax holiday for all workers and businesses.

That would amount to a 6.2% tax cut for each, freeing up money that employers could use for new hiring and workers could use to boost consumer spending.

But White House aides indicated that Obama will not embrace the idea. It would cost the government about $120 billion in revenue if adopted for two months — and a staggering $700 billion if continued for a full year.

Also, an unrestricted tax holiday would not be narrowly focused on Obama’s goal of adding jobs.

“I think the notion of giving payroll tax holidays is not very well targeted,” said Gary Burtless, an economist at the Brookings Institution think tank in Washington. “That’s going to go to all kinds of firms, even those that are reducing their employees.”

Instead, Alan Krueger, the Treasury Department’s chief economist, said Obama asked his economic team to “review options that are targeted and responsible” — that is, more narrowly focused and less likely to aggravate the government’s budget and deficit problems.

Recognizing that many Americans have an unfavorable view of last year’s massive stimulus program, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs has been taking pains to caution that “some big new stimulus plan is not in the offing.”

Among the narrower options under consideration is extending a tax break signed into law in March that exempts employers from their share of payroll taxes for the remainder of 2010 and provides other incentives if the employer hires someone who has been unemployed for at least 60 days.

The law, known as the Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment Act, or HIRE, passed with bipartisan support, and one of its main backers, Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), recently urged a six-month extension.

A White House aide, Jen Psaki, would not lay out specifics, but said that “the options under consideration build on measures the president has previously proposed.”

The moves being discussed are unlikely to change the jobs picture any time soon, Burtless said. He noted that the R&D tax credit, which expired Dec. 31, has repeatedly been renewed and is expected to be extended again this year.

Obama to propose new incentives to spur employment

The two Republicans at the top of California’s November ticket fanned out across the Central Valley this week, denouncing government dysfunction and asserting that their business experience would help them rescue the region’s unemployed workers, small firms and struggling family farms.

“I have spent a lot of time in the valley, and what is going on here due to lack of water is a humanitarian crisis,” gubernatorial nominee Meg Whitman told scores of supporters on a recent afternoon in a sweltering feed warehouse in Lemoore, about 30 miles south of Fresno. “It just breaks my heart.”

A hundred miles south at a technology company in Bakersfield, Senate nominee Carly Fiorina ticked off statistics about the slowing recovery and Kern County’s unemployment rate — contending that incumbent Democrat Barbara Boxer had failed the region by neglecting its water woes and by embracing what Fiorina described as the failed federal stimulus program.