John, you persist in missing the point. You argued that there was not public anger at current immigration levels and supported this argument by making the loss or gain of an election the test of it. You claim now–contra my argument–that this is a reasonable test. But none of your examples stand up. Health care was a major issue in the Pennsylvania election, but it was not the sole issue, being wrapped up with the economy under the Clintonian slogan of “fundamental change.” We know from what happened in the following year that Pennsylvania was an early sign of a growing general discontent with the first President Bush sparked off by, but not confined to, his reversal of “No new taxes.” (If national security were an election-winner, incidentally, the GOP would have won Pennsylvania since that occurred in the Fall of the year in which Bush won the Gulf War.) You then cite California’s 1994 results to argue that racial preferences are an election winner. In fact the 1994 California referendum victory was won by Proposition 187 that prohibited the provision of non-emergency state services for illegal aliens. It was the 1996 California results that you presumably mean when Proposition 209 banning racial preferences was passed. (Both initiatives won 59 per cent of the vote.) But the 1996 results make my case almost perfectly. An initiative, separating racial preferences from all other issues, won 59 per cent of votes cast; Bob Dole who embraced Proposition 209 won only 38 per cent of votes cast, presumably because 21 per cent of voters agreed with him on preferences but disagreed with him on other issues. If referenda rather than elections are the test, then, immigration shares equal billing with racial preferences as an election-winner. On the overall results of polling, Mark has made my case. I will add only that a three per cent vote for the notion that immigration is the most important problem facing America is perfectly compatible with 100 per cent of Americans believing that immigration is nonetheless a serious problem for the country. All these difficulties arise, John, because you seem to be denying the plain fact that there is serious public opposition to very high and largely uncontrolled immigration. Wouldn’t it be simpler to argue that there is such concern but that it can be overcome by reasonable argument over time?
Most Popular
Liberalism as Faith
The British philosopher John Gray is not someone to shy away from ‘difficult’ topics. If you are looking for a provocative long read this weekend, his new article in the Times Literary Supplement ought to be a contender. I didn’t agree with all of it (for example, I would argue that the supposedly ...
Read More

Our Cultural Crisis: A Kirkian Response
By Lee Edwards
Editors’ note: The following article is adapted from a speech the author delivered at the Heritage Foundation on March 14, 2018.
Few would dispute that we are in the middle of a grave cultural crisis. A despairing conservative critic wrote: “We are on the road to cultural disaster.”
He placed the ...
Read More

Everyone Should Agree: Aliens Who Commit Crimes Shouldn’t Be in This Country
The Trump administration’s efforts to get convicted criminal aliens off of our streets and out of the country was dealt a setback this week, thanks to the U.S. Supreme Court.
A majority in Sessions v. Dimaya held that a part of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) used to deport criminal aliens was ...
Read More

An Enduring Error
By Barry Latzer
Editor’s Note: The following piece originally appeared in City Journal. It is reprinted here with permission.
Fifty-one years ago, in July 1967, in response to an explosion of rioting in poor black urban neighborhoods around the United States, President Lyndon B. Johnson created the National Advisory ...
Read More

Lincoln and Leo XIII against the Nietzscheans
We live in an unusually anomalous culture whose politics and economics are now dominated by Nietzscheans of both the Right and the Left, united particularly in their contempt for long-standing, traditional ideas of reason and ethics, which they believe they have “seen through” and exploded. With the ...
Read More

The Mournful, Magnificent Sally Mann
‘Does the earth remember?" The infinitely gifted photographer Sally Mann asks this question in the catalogue of her great retrospective at the National Gallery in Washington. On view there is her series of Civil War battlefield landscapes, among the most ravishing works of art from the early 2000s. Once sites ...
Read More

What’s Scott Gottlieb Up to at the FDA?
Mike Riggs finds out.
Read More

A Marquette Professor Fights for His Speech Rights
‘Written perhaps by the ghost of Orwell.”
That is how Wisconsin supreme-court justice Michael Gableman described the Marquette University Faculty Hearing Committee (FHC) report that led to the 2015 termination of tenured professor John McAdams.
[jwplayer PZGqwdFV-wKJ9CRQU]
Yesterday the court ...
Read More

What Did Comey Tell President Trump about the Steele Dossier?
On her way out the White House door and out of her job as national-security adviser, Susan Rice writes an email-to-self. Except it’s not really an email-to-self. It is quite consciously an email for the record.
Her term having ended 15 minutes before, Rice was technically back in private life, where private ...
Read More