Data Brief Analysis

Student’s Name

Institutional Affiliation

Course

Instructor

Date
 Data Brief Analysis

Most Border Wall Opponents, Supporters say shutdown concessions are unacceptable-

Pew Research Center (file:///C:/Users/Admin/Downloads/1-16-19-Shutdown-FOR-

RELEASE-2.0.pdf)

Summary

This article demonstrates a prevalent serious issue due to the partisan divide on whether or not a

shutdown is necessary. At the time the article was being written, the partial shutdown of the

federal government was in its third week but at the time both those who opposed and supported

the expansion of the U.S.-Mexico border wall were against the use of concessions as means to

end the stalemate. The article states that a new survey by Pew Research Center revealed that

56% of Americans were substantially opposed to the expansion of the border wall while 44%

were in favor of the proposal. In essence, in relation to the expansion of the border wall, support

for the wall among Republicans was at a record high, while support from Democrats was at a

record low. In this sense, the issue of expanding the border wall was faced by wide partisan

differences which were also driven by political factors and influences. In this sense, one of the

highlights in the article is the level of differences and wide partisans among Americans in

relation to the building of the border wall to reduce immigration.

The data on the report results from a survey done by Pew Research Center on about 1500 adults.

Over the years, people's views about the building of the U.S.-Mexico border wall have

occasionally changed. The main takeaway from the report is that partisan gaps have remained

constant and even widened with more Republicans becoming supportive of the border wall while

the support among Democrats has gone down. The survey also reveals that support of the plans
is at about 46% among whites which is twice the support of blacks and Hispanics favoring

expanding the border wall who is at 20% and 23%, respectively. In relation to age, support for

expanding the border wall is at 48% (among those 50 years and older), 25% (age 18-29), and 36

(ages 30-49). On the other hand, about a third of Americans (34%) believe that building the

border wall would be significant in reducing illegal immigration while 20% believe expanding

the U.S.-Mexico border wall would result in a minor reduction in illegal immigration while 44%

are adamant that expanding the wall to have little or no impact.

One of the results from the report that surprised me was the level of influence political factors

such as political affiliations had on citizens' opinions regarding immigration issues. Most of

those interviewed tend to be guided by their partisan affiliations of being either Democrats or

Republicans. This is surprising because the aspect of illegal immigration into the U.S. is serious

and should be argued based on political party politics. Another surprising result from the report

is both Democrats and Republican supporters are opposed to the use of negotiations to solve the

stalemate related to the expansion of the wall. Both sets of supporters are adamant that their

congressional leaders (from both parties) should remain hardline and are against the idea of talks

and negotiations which relate to the shutdown. This is surprising because negotiations and talks

have always been a better approach to solving issues that are faced by significant and widened

partisan opinions and stands.

The results from the report have not significantly changed my thought on immigration because I

still believe that immigration is still a serious problem but new methods should be established to

deal with the challenge. From the report, it is evident that politics still dominate how leaders and

citizens approach the problem of illegal immigration in the U.S.

 Connection to Class Readings

The main connection between this report and class readings relates to the influence of factors

such as political affiliations, race, and age on addressing the issue of illegal immigration in the

U.S. From the report, it is evident that illegal immigration remains a contentious and divisive

issue in the U.S. with most citizen and leaders have different opinions and believes about the

problem. As stated in the class reading (Miriam and Sabrina, 2018), the Trump administration

has often labeled immigration as one of the major challenges to national security and American

workers. This is the reason that some of his top priorities have been the fortification of the

southwest border (Miriam and Sabrina, 2018). On the other hand, immigration has been one of

the center stages in most Republican campaigns and most of their supporters begin in the

construction of systems that discourage endless chains of relatives coming into the U.S. (Miriam

and Sabrina, 2018). On the other hand, most immigrants and Trump challengers believe that

immigration should be limited given the U.S. tends to offer immigrants opportunities to succeed

irrespective of their skin color, religion, or country of origin, by going to the extent of pointing

out to Trump's wife (Miriam and Sabrina, 2018). As such, similarly to the report, several class

readings also demonstrate that the topic of immigration is influenced by political partisan aspects

and issues such as race. In essence, the aspect of immigration has sharply divided leaders and

citizens over the years, sometimes resulting in emotional and heated debates and exchanges.

However, from the class readings and the report, one of the factors that all citizens agree on is

that illegal immigration into the U.S. possesses a huge problem if not effectively addressed.

However, the differences remain in the methods which should be used to address the problem.

The sharp divisions in relation to dealing with illegal immigration as demonstrated in the report

have also been revealed in several class readings such as the article “Illegality: A Contemporary
Portrait of Immigration” by Roberto G. Gonzalez and Steven Raphael. This reading begins by

stating that on June 23, 2016, the U.S. witnessed the upholding of the lower courts by the

Supreme Court to block President Obama’s administrative actions on immigration. The

significant aspect of the Supreme Court ruling was that it was on a basis of 4-4 votes meaning

even the judges were equally divided in their judgment (Roberto & Raphael, 2017). This

demonstrates that issues related to immigration tend to result in Americans including

professionals such as Supreme Court judges having varying and different views and beliefs on

how the issue should be approached. The reading, by Roberto and Raphael (2017) reveals how

the issue of illegal immigrants especially those leaving in the U.S. has often resulted in

differences regarding how they should be handled. Some believe that allowing illegal immigrants

who have stayed in the U.S. for many years to become citizens would be the best option for them

and their families while others argue that such trends would only encourage more illegal

immigrants into the U.S., with the hope of becoming citizens in later years. As a result, the report

(based on a survey by Pew Research Center) and the class readings have demonstrated that the

aspect of illegal immigration will be challenging to effectively address due to the influence of

political and race affiliations and the prevalence of differences in opinions among Americans.
 References

Gonzales, R. G., & Raphael, S. (2017). Illegality: A contemporary portrait of immigration. RSF: The

Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences, 3(4), 1-17.

Miriam J & Sabrina T. (2018) One Face of Immigration in America Is a Family Tree Rooted in

Asia. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/16/us/immigration-

family-chain-migration-foreign-born.html

Caroll D, Jocelyn K & Bridget J (2019). Most Border Wall Opponents, Supporters say shutdown

concessions are unacceptable. Pew Research Center.

file:///C:/Users/Admin/Downloads/1-16-19-Shutdown-FOR-RELEASE-2.0.pdf