Given recent reactions to the $61 billion aid package for Ukraine, it's clear opinions on this issue are contentious among Americans. As we look towards the 2024 election, these divisions could become even more pronounced. Many voters express concern about the amount of money being spent abroad while issues at home, such as rising food costs and threats towards minority communities, are not being adequately addressed.

Critics of the bill argue the aid package is a misuse of funds, asserting the money could be better spent addressing domestic issues. Some feel it’s an example of the U.S. involving itself in conflicts that do not directly affect the country, suggesting an “America Last” sentiment. They also express skepticism about the effectiveness of the aid and question the motivations behind the bill. Some on the right accuse Speaker Mike Johnson of pushing through the bill for political gain.

Supporters of the bill see it as a necessary measure to support allies and uphold democratic values in the face of aggression. They argue providing aid to Ukraine is in the U.S.'s strategic interest. They also claim opposing the bill equates to supporting Russian aggression and undermining democracy. However, there is stronger support for the parts of the bill that provide aid to Israel and Taiwan.

Many Americans express dissatisfaction with the bill as a whole. Their primary concern is the domestic impact, questioning why such a large sum of money is being sent overseas while American citizens are struggling with high living costs, poverty, and other social issues. They criticize the government for neglecting domestic needs in favor of foreign aid.

Another group, including some hardline Republicans, voice their opposition to the aid package for ideological reasons. They view it as fueling conflicts and promoting a globalist agenda, with some suggesting it's part of a Zionist project for world domination. They also express concerns about the potential for money to escalate conflicts in the Middle East and Asia.

There seems to be a growing sentiment of frustration among voters at the perceived neglect of domestic issues. This could potentially drive a surge in support for Trump and others who more often champions an "America First" stance.

Overall, it seems a significant portion of the population dislikes the massive foreign aid package. They believe funds should be used at home to address things like poverty, healthcare, and infrastructure. If this group becomes frustrated enough, they’ll likely support candidates in the 2024 elections who prioritize domestic issues over international ones.

Israel

Public commentary about a foreign aid bill to Israel reveals largely political divisions, with an array of sentiments across different voter groups and demographics.

Republicans

A strong sentiment of support for Israel is evident. Many Republicans express concern about Iran's attacks on Israel and emphasize the need for the U.S. to back Israel. They also highlight the role of the U.S. in ensuring Israel's security and the need for Congress to act in support of Israel.

Democrats

There’s a mixed bag of opinions among Democrats. Some express concern about the U.S. getting involved in the ongoing conflict between Israel and Iran, suggesting it's not in our best interest to get dragged into a potential war. However, other Democrats acknowledge the need for some form of aid to Israel but suggest the U.S. should impose strict political conditions on any such aid. They also express concern about the potential for the situation to escalate into a broader conflict in the Middle East.

Independents

Divided overall, Independents express support for Israel and condemn Iran's actions but also question why the U.S. should be involved in the conflict. There's also an undercurrent of frustration about U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East, with some Independents suggesting America should stay out of the conflict altogether.

There is also a narrative that connects the situation in Israel with the ongoing crisis in Ukraine, suggesting aid for both countries should be considered simultaneously. Some people express frustration that Ukraine is not receiving the same level of support as Israel.

Among various demographics, there is a correlation between religious beliefs and the level of support for Israel. Some use religious texts to justify supporting Israel, suggesting a strong connection between religious beliefs and political opinions on this issue.

Ukraine

Republicans

The Republicans and conservatives are quite divided. Some still voice strong support for providing aid. However, there are large swaths of right leaning voters who vehemently oppose sending more American tax dollars to Ukraine. Many in this group use strong language to emphasize what they view as a misuse of American funds. They do not want to spend money abroad while domestic issues are being neglected – particularly the crisis at the southern border. They also accuse RINOs (Republicans In Name Only) of betraying their party by supporting more foreign aid.

Democrats

A significant portion of Democrats remain strong advocates for providing taxpayer-funded aid to Ukraine. Many express their support or say they’ve signed petitions to get military aid to Ukraine. They criticize hold-ups in Congress and believe that helping Ukraine is essential for democracy.

Independents

Independent views seem to be scattered. Some express concern about escalating tensions and potential war, suggesting the U.S. should refrain from fueling the conflict by sending aid. Others seem frustrated about the U.S. providing aid abroad when there are urgent domestic issues.

Across all groups, there is a growing disapproval for sending tax dollars abroad while economic and border security issues worsen at home. There is also a perceived correlation between aid to Ukraine and Israel, with many seeing these as linked issues. Disparate political opinions about Ukraine and Israel seem to confuse the issue of foreign aid overall.

Some advocate for separate aid packages, depending on which conflict they have more sympathy for. Certain critics question the decision to allocate more aid to Ukraine than to Israel. They express skepticism about Ukraine's governance, citing President Zelensky's background as a comedian and actor and questioning his alleged ties to the CIA.

Taiwan and China

Again, analysis of a proposed foreign aid bill to Taiwan reveals a broad range of viewpoints, falling mostly along political lines. However, these viewpoints largely focus on the geopolitical implications of the proposed foreign aid, with many users discussing the broader context of international alliances and conflicts.

Republicans

Many Republicans seem to favor the aid bill as a means of supporting democratic allies like Taiwan. They express concern about the perceived threats from countries like Russia, Iran, China, and North Korea, with some calling for stronger measures to counter these countries. There is also some criticism of Trump's foreign policy, with some Republicans accusing him of aligning with Putin, which they believe goes against the party's principles.

Democrats

Among Democrats, there is a noticeable lack of online discussion, which may be more indicative of the lack of mainstream media coverage. In 2022, then-Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi’s trip to Taiwan was met with enthusiasm and approval from most Democratic voters. It is plausible Democrats may initially support a Taiwan aid bill, but ultimately withdraw support as geopolitical tensions rise (such as future tariffs on Chinese steel). There are also some voices calling for neutrality and peace, criticizing the U.S. for engaging in proxy wars and causing destabilization.

Independents

Independents express diverse views, with some supporting Israel and others siding with Iran. Some call for neutrality, criticizing both Israel and Iran for their actions. Many independents seem to be concerned about the potential for World War III, with some fearing that conflicts involving countries like Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea could escalate into a larger war.

MIG Reports analysis of what Americans are saying online about their tax returns reveals mixed sentiment, however, general dissatisfaction. Many taxpayers express frustration and confusion over the complex tax filing process. Some suggest the system is designed to benefit the wealthy and corporations over average citizens. While there is appreciation for the various resources and services available to assist with tax preparation, smaller tax returns this year, amid overarching economic concerns, diminish the overall mood during tax season.

Sentiment seems to vary by political affiliation. Republicans tend to have a more positive view of the tax return process, citing the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 as beneficial for lowering tax rates and simplifying the process. This Trump-era Act was the only noticed bright spot throughout the online discussions. Democrats, on the other hand, feel the tax cuts disproportionately favor the wealthy and corporations, leading to a more negative sentiment.

As Tax Day approached, online conversations increased to their highest point in the tax season, while sentiment dropped to its lowest point.

Demographics

Economic classes play a role in shaping sentiment. Lower and middle-class taxpayers often express frustration over the perceived unfairness of the tax system, feeling that they shoulder a disproportionate burden. Wealthier taxpayers, while also expressing some dissatisfaction with the complexity of the tax process, generally show a more positive sentiment due to the financial benefits they receive from tax cuts. Although, in general all Americans seem concerned about the economy and maintaining their standard of living.

Age also affects sentiment towards tax returns. Older taxpayers, who are often more acquainted with the tax filing process, show less frustration compared to younger taxpayers who may be navigating the process for the first time. The sentiment among different racial groups seems to be mixed, with no clear patterns emerging.

Geographically, there is less sway in discourse and sentiment; however, taxpayers in states with higher state and local taxes, such as California and New York, express more dissatisfaction due to caps on state and local tax deductions.

Overall, while there are resources available to help Americans with their tax returns, sentiment leans negative, with calls for a simpler, more equitable tax system. There is also an undercurrent of concern that tax dollars are not being used efficiently.

Economic Issues

The concept of Universal Basic Income (UBI) has been increasingly popular in recent years as the world grapples with rising living costs, the potential displacement of workers due to automation, and objections to income inequality. UBI is a government program providing every adult citizen with a set amount of money regularly. This stipend is given regardless of a person’s income or employment status. The goal is to provide a basic safety net, reducing poverty and providing financial security.

MIG Reports analysis of online commentary shows people's concerns about taxes, the perception of government misuse of tax money, and the struggle of ordinary citizens to meet their obligations. Many voters are raising questions about the fairness of tax systems, with some claiming they are being “taxed to death.” Many also assert that wealthy Americans are able to evade taxes through loopholes or illegal means.

There is a sense of disillusionment with the government as people complain, "What are you people in government doing with our money?" This signifies a lack of transparency and trust in how tax money is being used. It also suggests a disconnect between the government and the people, with the latter feeling overburdened and underrepresented.

Conversations also touch on the complexities of the current tax system. Some voters find it difficult to navigate, potentially falling into debt as a result. There are also concerns about changes to the tax system during an election year, suggesting a link between politics and financial policies.

Interestingly, some are advocating for illegal activities such as tax evasion and hacking as a form of resistance to unfair treatment. This indicates a level of frustration and distrust, as well as a willingness to resort to breaking the law to alleviate financial burdens.

Overall, American voters are grappling with financial pressures and a mistrust of government handling of taxes. It suggests people are in favor of reforms – whether UBI is a good solution in people’s minds is less clear.

• MIG Reports data indicates sentiment about Economic and Banking Issues is relatively stable.
• However, discussions around more nuanced topics like Monetary Policies and Minimum Wage are more likely to swing.
• This is likely due to lower volume and potentially heated, emotional topics along with newer instruments, such as UBI.

Minimum Wage

Recent discussions of a $20 minimum wage for fast-food workers in California also highly polarizing., There are strong opinions emerging from both supporters and detractors of a higher minimum wage. The situation is further complicated by broader conversations about UBI and the affordability of living, particularly in high-cost areas like California.

Proponents seek to debunk arguments against raising the minimum wage, asserting concerns about businesses being unable to afford the increase are unfounded. This group often frames the increase as a matter of fairness and social justice. They say large corporations can afford to pay their employees more.

Opponents of the wage increase believe it will lead to job losses and business closures. They argue small businesses will struggle the most to afford increased payroll costs. This, they say, will lead to layoffs or even bankruptcy. Critics also suggest the cost of wage increases would be passed on to consumers, leading to higher prices and negating any benefits for workers.

There’s also discussion of the impact of wage increases on poverty levels. Some argue that even with a $20 minimum wage, many workers will still struggle to make ends meet, particularly in areas with a high cost of living. They believe that a more comprehensive solution, like a UBI, may be necessary to truly address poverty and income inequality.

Lastly, there is a narrative of anticipation and observation. Some are keenly watching to see the real-world impacts of the wage increase on employment rates, business performance, and workers' quality of life.

Monetary Policy

The role of the Federal Reserve, interest rates, and the economic impact of UBI also factors into the discussion. This conversation emerges against the backdrop of Fed Chair Jerome Powell's announcement that interest rate cuts are not imminent. The announcement sparked various reactions across the financial and political spectrum.

Some voters express skepticism and frustration towards the Federal Reserve's actions, questioning its ability to manage the national debt. They speculate it could potentially reach a staggering $50 trillion by 2024. However, Powell's stance also raises questions about the feasibility and implications of UBI.

Some argue implementing UBI would require borrowing more federal dollars, inevitably exacerbating the national debt. This is a contentious issue, as many struggling Americans desire immediate financial support, which hampers managing the long-term economic health of the country.

Because UBI is deeply intertwined with broader economic policies and politics writ large, particularly those concerning the Federal Reserve and interest rates, it is likely UBI will remain a divisive topic, especially given previous government aid during COVID.

The overall sentiment towards Bernie Sanders' proposed Thirty-Two Hour Work Week Act is largely negative. A significant majority of responses criticize the potential for increased taxes, along with Sanders' personal wealth and perceived tax avoidance.

One recurring theme in the reactions is concern over potential tax increases. Voters repeatedly express the belief that Sanders' proposal would lead to higher taxes, with some suggesting that this would be a direct result of businesses being expected to pay their workers more while also reducing their prices.

Another consistent theme is criticism of Sanders' personal wealth. Many express frustrations with Sanders, himself a millionaire like many in the political class, advocating for policies that they believe would place a heavier tax burden on the average citizen. There is repeated mention of Sanders' lake house in New Hampshire and the perception that he does not pay taxes to support education in the state.

Many people also consider Sanders' proposal impractical. They fear reducing the work week to 32 hours would result in lower productivity and necessitate overtime work, which would be taxed at a higher rate. Some argue that businesses would not be able to survive and pay their bills working only 32 hours per week.

Talking About - Bernie Sanders

Sentiment - Bernie Sanders

Critics also argue that Sanders has not done enough to help the working class during his time in Congress. They express skepticism about the effectiveness of the alleged goal of the legislation.

There are several references to the effects of illegal immigration on the job market. Some see the influx of illegal immigrants as a threat to American workers, particularly in industries like meatpacking. They argue that Sanders' proposal does not address this issue.

The narrative also reflects a broader discussion about the state of the working class in America. There is a sense of frustration about perceived inequality, exploitation, and wasted tax dollars. There are calls for greater unionization and demands for respect for blue collar workers.

In general, the reception of Sander’s proposal is negative. However, it also generated an underlying debate about wider issues like immigration and the distribution of wealth. This suggests that reactions are influenced by broader socio-economic factors.

Americans seem doubtful that February’s CPI report claiming 3.2% inflation accurately captures the rising costs they face day-to-day. Many voters say the real cost of living is much higher than what the CPI suggests. They cite increasing prices in housing, healthcare, food, and education, which they feel aren't accurately reflected in the index.

Pain Points for Everyday Citizens

Despite Democrats historically being vocal against the wealthy class gaining unfair advantages, this sentiment is now growing among all Americans. More voters identify the political class as among the “wealthy” and see elites as the primary beneficiaries of the current tax system.

• Republicans tend to be very negative on the current state of the economy, pointing to life during the Trump era as more affordable.
• Sentiment towards Trump on inflation is slightly higher than sentiment towards Biden among all voters.
• Trump averaged 47% support on inflation over the last week compared to Biden’s average of 44%.

• In swing states, Trump also maintained a 47% average approval on inflation to Biden’s 44% and an overall sentiment of 43%.

While most voters admit that costs have increased across the board, there are particular areas they say they’re feeling economic pain.

The cost of housing is a common complaint for all Americans – gaining bipartisan discontent. People would like to return to pre-COVID housing affordability. They point to the idea that there should be a 41% drop in home prices and a 69% increase in incomes to reach previous affordability levels.

Food prices are another subject of concern. Many online are skeptical of Biden administration promises to lower them. For both food and housing, there seems to be a common perception that times were “better” or “easier” during the Trump administration.

• U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics data shows that inflation has risen significantly in the last four years, still not coming down to the target rate of 2%.
• The cost of cars, housing, and food are also shockingly high in the last several years.

What Americans Say is Causing Inflation

A common sentiment among left-leaning voters is that corporations and the wealthy are not paying their fair share of taxes. The Biden administration has recently been claiming that “shrinkflation” unfairly perpetrated by corporations is to blame for American dollars barely putting food on the table. Many Democrat voters seems to sympathize with this explanation – although most are still extremely unhappy with the reality of rising costs.

Biden supporters tend to argue that tax burdens are shifted onto the middle and lower classes, thereby increasing their cost of living. Some are also vocal in the belief that immigrants contribute significantly to the economy through taxes, contradicting the stereotype that they're a drain on resources.

Right-leaning voters frequently criticize the government for excessive spending. They argue spending is a bigger cause of higher taxes and increased cost of living for citizens. They believe taxes should be cut and government spending should be severely curbed.

Unlike some vocal progressive voters, most Republicans and some moderates believe that illegal immigrants are an unacceptable cost to the U.S. economy and the average taxpayer. They point to housing, food, and other services provided to illegal immigrants as unwanted and unauthorized by voters.

Taxes and inflation are among the top issues Democrats and Republicans discuss as important. Sentiment on the economy is slightly higher among democrats, but they discuss it more, with Republicans placing more emphasis on border security.

Regardless of political affiliation, voters seem to agree the cost of living has noticeably risen and many struggle to make ends meet. There’s a general sentiment often attributing financial difficulties to low wages and high taxes.

Americans Blame the Government for These Difficult Times

Many voters reiterate their belief that spending money on people who don't generate income or pay taxes – like illegal immigrants – is not a feasible solution to American economic pain. They argue for a system where people who make money and employ others keep more of their earnings, allowing them to invest, hire, and thereby stimulate the economy. These voters blame rampant spending on the government, resisting calls for higher tax revenue to ease economic burdens.

There is a recurring belief that the government's actions, such as printing money, are contributing to the devaluation of the currency, which in turn leads to inflation. Many voters also attribute high inflation to President Biden's policies and actions.

At last week’s State of the Union address, President Biden continued efforts made by Democrats in recent years to position the Democratic Party as the Party of the working class, taking on the rich and corporations. “Look, I’m a capitalist,” Biden remarked. “If you want to make or can make a million or millions of bucks, that’s great. Just pay your fair share in taxes.”

Taking on the wealthy represents a pivot from the era of Bill Clinton Democrats, whose Clinton ads of the day now sound more like modern Republicans. Clinton told viewers in a televised ad during his first bid for office, “Our government has failed us. And one of its worst failures has been welfare. I have a plan to end welfare as we know it.”

Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren has been on the forefront of pushing Democrats to the modern “Eat the Rich” Party brand. But despite Biden and Warren’s confidence in their appeal to middle class voters, online discussions surrounding Warren’s rhetoric on raising taxes does not just land on deaf ears, it enrages distrustful Americans who increasingly believe Democrats are the party of the elites.

What They’re Saying

Normally, Warren’s tweets garner around a hundred responses, but Warren’s tweet praising efforts to unleash the IRS on the “Ultra Rich” earned more than 5,000 responses. 

MIG Reports’ analysis of responses to the tweet uncovered a combination of distrust and mockery. People expressed a “perception of hypocrisy,” with a number of users criticizing Warren for her personal wealth, suggesting she should be taxed more heavily or accusing her of not paying her fair share.

The theme of distrust and of hypocrisy extended beyond Warren, with many responses to Warren’s tweet lowering Warren's sentiment by associating her with other controversial figures such as Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden. This discourse highlighted how the President’s own son pleaded guilty to tax evasion.

Others responding to the Massachusetts Senator’s tweet asserted that the level of tax revenue is not the problem, but government spending. Voters mentioned Warren “arguing that the focus should be on reducing spending rather than increasing taxes.” 

By the Numbers

Since Warren’s comments on raising taxes, MIG Reports finds a serious blow to her approval among those discussing her online. Warren tends to hover below 250 mentions online. This earns her a near neutral approval rating on days when she has low online discussion volume.

• On the day Warren tweeted calling for higher taxes, her mentions doubled their usual rate, and her approval rating fell.
• On March 10th, Warren's approval rating was 47%. The day of her tax comments, approval tumbled to 43% and fell to 41% by March 12th.

It’s clear there is a direct correlation between Warren’s tax-the-rich rhetoric and her drop in approval. Warren’s ratio of positive to negative comments in discussions involving economics showed a ratio of 25 positive percentage points to 85 negative percentage points.

A Historic Shift

Perhaps the best explanation for why efforts from Democrats like Warren and Biden increasingly fall on deaf ears is found in the partisan wealth divide in elections. In 2016, Pew Research found that, “Although many middle-class areas voted for Barack Obama in 2008, they overwhelmingly favored Donald Trump in 2016.”

This trend has continued since Trump’s rise in politics. Axios reported that, “64% of congressional districts with median incomes below the national median are now represented by Republicans.” Moreover, despite regularly labeling Republicans as the “Party of the Rich,” Democrats represent nine of the 10 richest Congressional Districts in America.

It's easy to understand why middle-class Americans simply don’t trust Democrats to hold elites accountable. Americans see politicians as part of the elite. Households across America are united in banning members of Congress from stock trading. Yet Democrat legislators continue to utilize insider information to make suspiciously successful stock trades, earning millions in a profession that pays $174,000 a year.

President Biden’s efforts to hold tax cheats accountable falls flat with Americans who have been following Hunter’s tax evasion charges. Rhetoric from Democrat politicians about taking on the rich or fixing the financial system doesn’t seem to be convincing working-class Americans to forget that Democrats are often among the "Ultra-Rich” they decry.

To many Americans, Democrats both act and speak like the elite class they claim to hold accountable. Online discussions suggest middle-class Americans can hardly distinguish DNC talking points from the elites they felt mocked them for not being able to “just work from home” during COVID. Many normal Americans feel attacked when the rich, politicians, or media commentators tell them to simply buy a $50,000 electric car to save the planet. Republicans will likely continue to win middle class America, a crucial segment of the electorate, if Democrats continue to act and talk like the people Americans feel detest them.

Discussion is heating up about the amount of taxpayer dollars being used to fund services and benefits for illegal immigrants. Headlines are emerging suggesting cities like Denver are cutting back on city employees to free up funds for immigrants. Federal funds are being diverted to support illegal immigrants with shelter, food, and cash.

These headlines are stirring up ire among American citizens who are already concerned about their own finances and the larger economy. Many people online express dissatisfaction with plans like the proposal to give $10,000 debit cards to illegals. More people are becoming vocal about their feelings that these initiatives are a misuse of tax dollars.

There are differing viewpoints which align with political affiliations, however, the issue is starting to supersede partisan lines. Generally, Republicans lean towards stricter immigration policies and criticize using tax dollars for illegal immigrants. Democrats tend to favor more lenient immigration policies and the provision of public services for migrants.

But as the Biden administration is forced to address the issue, there is growing bipartisan awareness of the impact on all Americans.

Public Opinion Is Shifting in Favor of Strong Borders

As the border issue reaches a fever pitch, public opinion grows more complex. It cannot be accurately summarized by party affiliation alone. Many variables, including personal experiences, geographic location, and demographic factors seem to be influencing voter perspectives on illegal immigration.

Overall, MIG data shows Americans’ desire to prioritize national interests, especially the safety and protection of citizens. Many argue that tax dollars should be used to care for American citizens before aiding illegal immigrants.

There is an increasing amount of support for building a wall along the southern border. Many people are mentioning a Monmouth University poll that indicated a majority of Americans now want a wall.

The border crisis continues to be the top issue for voters leading up to the election. MIG data suggests that public sentiment is shifting towards stricter border control.

Biggest Voter Issues

Governor Abbott’s Migrant Bussing

Many Texas voters approve of Governor Abbott's initiative to bus migrants to sanctuary cities. They view it as a way to lighten the burden on Texas and give sanctuary states what they asked for.

Texans are desperate to relieve the strain on resources and population overrun and believe that sanctuary cities should bear more responsibility. They also believe that this initiative is pushing the consequences of open-border policies into the spotlight, forcing a dialogue about immigration reform

Voters in all border states argue that the responsibility for immigration should be a national issue, rather than falling solely on border states like Texas.

Voters in Sanctuary Cities

Among Americans living in sanctuary cities, there are complaints that they are being targeted and burdened due to their policies. There is less discussion from residents of sanctuary cities, but those who voice public opinions tend to be critical of bussing migrants out of border states.

People in sanctuary cities raise concerns about the constitutionality of Abbott's actions. They question whether the Governor has the legal authority to dictate where immigrants can and cannot go.

They also worry about the economic implications of an influx of immigrants. They fear that it could lead to job losses for locals, wage suppression, and increased competition for limited resources.

There’s also talk of illegal immigrants overcrowding schools and healthcare systems and increasing crime rates. Some, however, are vocal in the opinion that sanctuary cities should welcome immigrants and provide them with the support they need to integrate into society.

Disapproval for Funding Illegal Immigrants

Most of the public commentary shows Americans are opposed to using tax dollars to fund services for illegal immigrants. They argue that it is unfair for tax-paying citizens to finance benefits for people not legally present in the country. This perspective often stems from a belief that illegal immigrants are taking advantage of the system, and the administration is encouraging it.

Americans say illegals are taking jobs from American workers, draining public resources, and contributing to crime rates. More voters also argue that tax dollars should be used to improve services for American citizens who are already struggling to get by.

There’s a growing sentiment that illegal immigrants should not be eligible for social services like healthcare and education, and some say they should not be allowed to work. There is frustration and anger around the perception that illegal immigrants are being favored over U.S. citizens.

Many express dissatisfaction with the current state of law enforcement, blaming Democrats for crime problems in their cities. They see this as an additional burden on taxpayers and businesses and call for a change in leadership. Many people also complain that Democrats have cut police budgets, exacerbating crime in places like San Francisco and New York.

A swell of news stories involving violent crimes by illegals is amplifying the frustration. Commenters refer to specific cases where illegal immigrants are accused or convicted of violent acts and, sometimes, repeatedly allowed back into the country. They express a sense of outrage and distress, accusing the government of wasting tax dollars on criminals.

The ire is often directed at Democratic politicians for supporting open border policies and Republicans for failing to act or oppose Democrats. And, while this can still be seen as a partisan issue, more Democrats and Independents are beginning to speak out about protecting America’s border.

Approval for Funding Illegal Immigrants

There is still a segment of voters – mostly Democrats – who support more funding for illegal immigrants. They see this crisis as a humanitarian issue. They point out that many illegal immigrants work in low-paying jobs and contribute to the economy through sales and income taxes. They also argue that denying services to illegal immigrants may lead to public health issues and increased poverty.

Some say religious organizations, particularly large ones, should pay taxes. Their reasoning is that this would increase revenue and reduce the burden on taxpayers. They argue that religious organizations should contribute the way businesses and individuals do.

This group also advocates for immigrants being allowed to work and pay taxes. They believe this would be more beneficial to the economy than the current situation.

Some Democrats argue that sanctuary cities provide a haven for undocumented immigrants. They believe migrants enhance the cultural diversity of the nation.

Those who approve of spending taxpayer money on illegals tend to view migrant bussing initiative as a form of political opportunism. They accuse Abbott of exacerbating a humanitarian crisis and hold him responsible for the distress and trauma experienced by both immigrants and first responders.