All,

CNN recently (March 31-April 2) conducted a poll of Americans to see how they felt about immigration reform. The result is yet another example attesting to the ill-informed average American voter, the blunt tool that is polling, and the inconsistencies that ensue.

The poll results are as follows:

How important will the issue of illegal immigration be when you vote in the congressional elections this fall?

Single most important: 14%

Very important: 43%

Somewhat important: 31%

Not important at all: 9%

Don’t know: 3%

Do you favor or oppose legislation to build fences along the U.S.-Mexican border and increase penalties for illegal immigration?

Favor: 47%

Oppose: 44%

Don’t know: 9%

How much sympathy do you have for illegal immigrants and their families?

Very sympathetic: 24%

Somewhat sympathetic: 46%

Somewhat unsympathetic: 12%

Very unsympathetic: 14%

Don’t know: 4%

The poll has at least two glaring problems:

(1) I consider immigration reform an important issue. However, I consider it a way by which to assess my representatives. Given all my research, the public is grossly misinformed about the costs/benefits of the status quo as well as Congress’ intended “resolutions.” Thus, as I mentioned in my letters to my senators and congressman, I will be watching to see whether they act on the basis of principled, informed conclusions, or whether they will cede to this rabid and confused public in order to save their political careers. What’s more, will they spend the coming weeks or months trying to inform the public of the real situation and facts, or will they simply use the current climate to their own advantage. However, if I was a respondent in this poll, that would put me in the same camp with the vast number of those who I just called rabid and misinformed. In my opinion, without more sophisticated questions such a poll would be more likely to lead folks in Congress to act in their own self-interest, interpreting the strong majority concern as an impetus to craft strong (and, I believe, erroneous) legislation.

(2) I’m struck by the vast majority of those who say they are sympathetic (70%), given the support for the fence and penalties. Questions like these are particularly hard: my guess is that most people are not nearly so sanguine, but that their conscience demands that they respond thus when put on the spot. That, or these people do not have a clue what the legislation entails.

Occasionally TIME sits down a group of folks, polls them on an issue and proposed legislation, then informs them in detail of the legislation and the issue, then polls them again. The last time they did this, the issue in question was Social Security reform. The numbers were both unsurprising and yet terrifying: the large majority in favor of reform completely switched to opposition once they knew what was going on. The more cynical among you may think that TIME did their explaining in a biased manner. I wasn’t there, so I can’t say whether the information was presented in a snide manner or with sarcasm. What I do know is that they merely laid out the status quo and then the president’s proposal.

Too bad we can’t do that with everyone concerning everything. Sigh.

-W.