Growing Dissatisfaction with Immigration Policies

NEW YORK CITY New research presents evidence that the public doubts U.S. foreign policy is working and is increasingly skeptical about whether anything can turn the situation around. In a joint online release today, Public Agenda and its partner Foreign Affairs made public results from the fifth edition of the Confidence in U.S. Foreign Policy Index.

This latest Confidence in U.S. Foreign Policy Index (CFPI) which tracks attitudes on more than 110 items covering nearly all major aspects of foreign policy, along with its Anxiety Indicator based on five key leading indicators presents insights into the publics exceptionally low confidence in the nations foreign policy and increasing pessimism about a range of strategies to improve the United States standing. Analysis and data for questions asked in all four editions of the CFPI are available at: http://www.publicagenda.org/reports/public-agenda-confidence-us-foreign-policy-index-vol-5

PERCEIVED FAILURE CONTAGION

The loss in faith in many strategies to improve national security applies across the spectrum to strategies generally considered "hawkish" or "dovish", exercising "hard" or "soft" power. On some strategies, confidence has declined slowly over two years, while on others it has dropped sharply in the past six months.

"The Petraeaus report may have slowed the get-out-of-Iraq momentum but overall confidence in our foreign policy is eroding across a wide spectrum of issues," said Public Agenda Chairman Daniel Yankelovich. "The administration and Congress seem isolated from the public."

"The public sees no silver bullets for current problems, and theyre correct," said Gideon Rose, Managing Editor of Foreign Affairs. "But whether that is cause for despair, of course, depends on just how desperate one thinks those problems actually are."

Since the CFPIs inception, the public has favored just a few strategies to make the Unites States more secure better intelligence gathering, energy independence and controlling illegal immigration. But since June 2005, even these areas have fallen in the publics confidence. The publics view of the efficacy of these strategies to do a great deal to improve U.S. security has suffered significantly:

	June 2005		Sept. 2007
Improving the effectiveness of our intelligence operations	65%		56%
Becoming less dependent on other countries for our supply of energy	n/a	-	53%
Tighter controls on immigration to the United States	58%		52%
Showing more respect for the views and needs of other countries	49%		38%
Tighter control over foreign students coming to the United States	41%		36%
Maintaining our military edge by exploring new technologies or placing weapons in space	40%		34%
Closer cooperation with the United Nations	34%	-	34%
Closer cooperation with the European Union	n/a	-	28%
Creating policies that support equal rights and educational opportunities for women in Muslim countries	41%		27%
Attacking countries that develop weapons of mass destruction	n/a	-	25%
Giving government more power to investigate, even if we had to give up some privacy in order to do it	n/a	-	25%
Building large projects in developing countries	29%		23%
Doing more to help Muslim countries develop economically	27%		19%

THE PETRAEUS EFFECT: SLIGHT

Iraq remains the central foreign policy concern for the American public. With the Democratic leaderships efforts to force a timeline for withdrawal, a major White House campaign to build support for the ongoing military strategy in Iraq and much-discussed benchmark reports from General David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker all culminating shortly before the Index survey was in the field, a change in public opinion could have been in the offing. And yet, public opinion has changed little.

Compared to six months ago, the intensity of the publics negativity about progress in Iraq seems to have declined very slightly, but the public is just as doubtful about the ultimate outcome. The Petraeus effect on public attitudes seems to be mostly a shift in how intensely the public disapproves of how the war is being waged. The number who give the United States low grades (C, D or F) for meeting our objectives in Iraq hasnt changed significantly, but the number who give clearly failing grades (D or F) declined 6 points to 46 percent. The slight shift away from failing grades was shared almost equally among Democrats and Republicans, though the Democrats still remain far more critical.

On the fundamentals, opinion on Iraq shows hardly any change at all:

• Roughly two-thirds say the United States should withdraw (48 percent say within the next 12 months, 19 percent say immediately)
• About half say there is not much the U.S. can do to create a democratic Iraq (51 percent) or to control the violence there (49 percent).
• Nearly half (47 percent) consider Iraq mostly a civil war
• Sixty percent say Americas safety from terrorism does not depend on success in Iraq
• Fifty-two percent say they do not think our government has told the public the truth about the war.

THE AHMADINEJAD EFFECT: SHIFTING?

The Index has identified a trend toward strong public preference for non-military solutions in foreign affairs. Sixty-five percent say the government should put more emphasis on diplomatic and economic efforts rather than military solutions, and even more reject force in specific situations like dealing with Iran and Pakistan. Yet, while substantial majorities continue to prefer diplomatic action over force, there has been slight movement towards approval for more aggressive action.

On Iran, people are not ready to embrace force, but fewer than before are confident that diplomacy will solve the problem. Given five different approaches to dealing with Iran, the number who favor diplomacy to establish better relations fell nine points, to 35 percent (still the most popular choice). The number who favored threatening or actually using force rose six points to 19 percent. The highly negative media coverage of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejads visit to the United States (which occurred during the fielding of the Index survey), likely had some negative impact on Americans feelings about the likelihood that negotiating with Iran would work. In fact, those who think attacking countries that develop weapons of mass destruction would do a great deal for national security jumped eight points, to 25 percent.

MOUNTING FRUSTRATION ON IMMIGRATION

As legislation addressing the illegal immigration problem moved through Congress earlier this year, expectations rose that new laws would be put in place. After the collapse of immigration reform efforts in May, the deadlock seems to have taken its toll on public attitudes. There has been a sharp jump in the number of those who give the government failing grades on dealing with immigration.

Since the Index's inception, the public has never been happy with government efforts on illegal immigration, but attitudes have become increasingly negative. Eighty-three percent give the government low grades on protecting our borders from illegal immigration, an increase of 9 points since June 2005. And the shift toward intense negativity is sharp: 6 in 10 now give the government D or F on immigration, with the number giving F jumping eight points in the past six months.

Compared to other issues the Index queries, a relatively large portion of Americans believe the government can take action to address the situation (46 percent say government can do a lot, 34% say it can do something). Fifty-two percent say that controlling immigration would be enhance security a great deal and 45 percent say they worry a lot that its too easy for illegal immigrants to enter the country. Addressing illegal immigration is among the highest-rated strategies for increasing security and it is one of the publics greatest concerns.

This is an area where there is little or no difference in negativity by party. Only 16% of Republicans and 15% of Democrats give the government high grades for protecting borders from illegal immigration.

ANXIETY STILL RUNNING HIGH

Using a scale of 1 to 200, Public Agendas Anxiety Indicator gauges Americans anxiousness or contentment with the nations foreign policy. The Fall 2007 Anxiety Indicator stands at 136, well above the neutral mid-point of 100 and a statistically insignificant 1-point drop from March 2007.

The 136 reading on the Anxiety Indicator is a composite score, reflecting the publics concern on multiple dimensions of foreign policy. The indicator reflects a majority view among the public that theyre worried about the nations position in the world, that the country faces increasing danger abroad, U.S. policy is on the wrong track and that the United States is viewed negatively abroad. Taking the five indicator questions point-by-point:

• Eighty-five percent are worried about the way things are going for the United States in world affairs (34 percent worry a lot)
• Seventy-nine percent say the world is becoming more dangerous for the United States and its people (45 percent say much more dangerous)
• Seventy-four percent say the United States is not doing a good job as a leader in creating a more peaceful and prosperous world (32 percent say a poor job)
• Sixty-four percent believe the rest of the world sees the United States negatively (30 percent say very negatively)
• Sixty-five percent say U.S. relations with the rest of the world are on the wrong track

Public Agenda researchers hypothesize that opinion reaching the 150 mark on the Anxiety Indicator would represent a collapse of public support for U.S. foreign policy. The 136 reading indicates a stabilization over the last six months a high level of anxiety, but a level that has not continued its previous upward move toward full-blown crisis of confidence.

Methodology

Public Agendas study probes much deeper than typical polls, examining core strategies and beliefs about Americas role in the world and how much the public holds the government accountable on specific issues. Supported with funding from The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation and the Ford Foundation, the index covers more than 25 different issues through more than 110 different survey questions and has been issued biannually. Public Agendas foreign policy survey has been fielded five times, first in June 2005, again in January 2006, September 2006 and March 2007, and most recently September 2007. Public Agenda interviews a nation-wide random sample of adult Americans to track the changing state of mind of average Americans toward foreign policy what worries people most, where they support or resist present foreign policy, what their priorities are, and what foreign policy initiatives make sense to them.

Sampling: This fifth iteration of the study was based on telephone interviews with a national random sample of 1,011 adults over the age of 18 between September 17 and September 27, 2007. It covered over 25 major policy areas in more than 110 different survey questions. The margin of error for the overall sample is plus or minus three percentage points. Full survey results can be found at www.publicagenda.org or www.confidenceinforeignpolicy.org.

Since 1922, the Council on Foreign Relations has published Foreign Affairs, America's most influential publication on international affairs and foreign policy. Foreign Affairs has a circulation of 140,000 and was ranked #1 in influence by U.S. opinion leaders in last year's national study of publications conducted by Erdos & Morgan, the premier business-to-business research firm. Inevitably, articles published in Foreign Affairs shape the political dialogue for months and years to come. www.foreignaffairs.org

Public Agenda is a nonprofit organization dedicated to nonpartisan public policy research. Founded in 1975 by former U.S. Secretary of State Cyrus Vance and Daniel Yankelovich, the social scientist and author, Public Agenda is well respected for its influential public opinion surveys and balanced citizen education materials. Its mission is to inject the public's voice into crucial policy debates. Public Agenda seeks to inform leaders about the public's views and to engage citizens in discussing complex policy issues.