By Sam Frescoe
http://samfrescoeproject.blogspot.com/
#SamFrescoe #civilrights #DACA #Dreamers
#BernieSanders
It’s not a secret that I am horizontally opposed to maintaining
illegal aliens located within the United States. In my view, to ignore, condone,
excuse, deny, or encourage their unlawful behavior is illegal, unethical, and
immoral. Let the natural consequence of their choices serve as a deterrent
against future misconduct.
On the other hand,…
- I
am in favor of legal aliens.
- I
am in favor of legal immigrants.
- I
am in favor of law abiding persons.
- I
am in favor of legislative changes (Constitution, Art-1, Sec-8, Para-4).
- I
am in favor of due process.
- I
am in favor of equity under the law.
- I
am in favor of guilt by standard and punishment by proportion.
And so, when I see and hear a United States Senator take the
floor and offer demands and remarks to the contrary, I am drawn in for a look
and listen.
Bottom Line Up Front
There is no reason to believe that you are required to
subordinate your mind to the needs, wants, and desires of those in government.
It’s up to each of us to look past the spectacle and see for ourselves what is
known over what is felt, what can be proven over what is supposed.
SANDERS: Let me begin
by congratulating Chloe Kim, a first generation American who won a gold medal
for the United States in the women's half-pipe snowboarding event this week.
SAM:
This is an indication of an emotional appeal. From this point forward I’m
expecting Sanders to use language that either expresses demonization (fear,
guilt, anger, disgust, and empathy) or righteousness (pride, relief, and hope). While some “facts” are likely to be true, and
relative to the subject, minor; the majority of “facts” relevant to his case
are likely to be false or misleading.
SANDERS: Her father
John Jin Kim emigrated from South Korea to the United States in 1982; became a
dishwasher at a fast food restaurant; studied engineering at El Camino College;
after working at low skill jobs, and then became an engineer. He left his
engineering job to support his daughter’s snowboarding ambitions so that he
could drive her five and a half hours to the mountains for training. Congratulations
to Chloe and to her entire family. You make the United States proud.
SAM:
And…here it is; the emotional appeal of full display. Its purpose is to set the
rhetorical stage in a way that suggests the following: greatness achieved by first
generation Americans is caused by allowing immigrant parents into the United
States.
SANDERS: Madam President,
the whole debate that we are now on undertaking about immigration and the
Dreamers…
SAM:
Okay. Sanders is indicating political intent: to act on behalf of Dreamers. At
this point, given his professional career and prior Presidential campaign,
ideology becomes critically important. – Senator Sanders is a self-identified
progressive and socialist. In my view, this means that he has two default
positions: 1) every opposing view represents an evil straight out of the Right;
and 2) government action is the only solution for curing the faults of
human-kind. He is not interested in understanding the virtues of differing
views (all discrimination is wrong); he is interested in pushing his position
as a moral giver (only his discernment is righteous). He is not interested in enabling
the People through self-governance; his is interested in fixing the People
through state-governance.
SANDERS: …has become
somewhat personal for me because it has reminded me, in a very strong way, that
I and my brother are first generation Americans. We are the sons of an
immigrant who came to this country at the age of 17 without a nickel in his
pocket. A young man who was a High School dropout, who did not know one word of
English, and had no particular trade.
SAM:
It’s back to the emotional appeal. In my view, Sanders is attempting to paint
himself as a champion of hope by offering his family history as collateral for
street-credit.
SANDERS: And a few
years ago my brother and I and our families went to the small town that he came
from; and it just stunned me the kind of courage that he showed, and millions
of other people showed, leaving their homeland to come to a very different
world. Without money, in many cases. Without knowledge of the language.
SAM:
The emotional appeal continues. This installment is intended to couch Dreamers
on par with the plights of the past, and those courageous enough to do
something about it. – For the sake of moving forward, I’ll assume his claims
are true. With that said, his facts are relatively minor and irrelevant when
compared to the breadth and depth of protecting illegal aliens residing within
the United States today.
SANDERS: No, my father immigrated
to this country because the town that he lived in Poland was incredibly poor. There
was no economic opportunity for him. People there struggled to provide food,
put food on the table for their families. Hunger was a real issue in that area.
My father came to this country to avoid the violence and bloodshed of WWI which
came to his part of the world in a ferocious manner; and he came to this
country to escape the religious bigotry that existed then because he was Jewish.
My father lived in this country until his death in 1962. He never made a lot of
money. He was a paint salesman.
SAM:
And, more emotional appeal. In my view, Sanders is attempting to identify Dreamers
as an oppressed people-group that must be saved by the United States. Therefore,
Sanders is invoking identify politics: a set of political positions (legalization)
based on the interests and perspectives of a particular people group (Dreamers
seeking to avoid harm).
SANDERS: My father was
not a political person. But it turned out, that without talking much about it,
he was the proudest American that you ever saw. And he was so proud of this
country because he was deeply grateful that the United States had welcomed him
in, and allowed him opportunities that would have been absolutely unthinkable
from where he came.
SAM:
I believe this claim is important. If true, then it’s likely that his father
fully assimilated into the American culture and embraced its way of life as a
law abiding citizen. Whereas, Dreamers are illegal aliens.
SANDERS: But the truth
is that immigration is not just my story. It's not just the story of one young
man coming from Poland who managed to see two kids go to college and one of his
sons become a United States Senator. It's not just my family's story. It is of
the story of my wife's family who came from Ireland. And it’s the story of tens
of millions of American families who came from every single part of this world.
SAM:
Agreed, but when weighed relative to legalizing illegal aliens, this
observation is a red herring and irrelevant. Additionally, Sanders never
acknowledges a glaring fact: immigration, because it’s a function of law, can
be done legally and illegally. Therefore, it’s likely that both variations
exist. – Pulling it together…Sanders desires to advocate for Dreamers as their
champion of hope. Sanders wants others to agree: that Dreamers are on par with
the oppressed immigrants of the past; that America and Americans should provide
for their relief; and that failing to do so will cause the suppression of
greatness contained within the next, first-generation of Americans.
I
must acknowledge that Sanders is master of the emotional appeal. As emotional
appeals go, this one is quite good (if not excellent).
Issue-1: Protecting Dreamers
SANDERS: Madame President,
in September of 2017, President Trump precipitated the current crisis we are
dealing with by revoking President Obama's DACA executive order.
SAM:
Now, the coin has flipped from declarations of righteousness to prescriptions
of demonization. Sanders begins with the demonization of President Trump. Simply
stated, he wants others to agree to be angry at Trump for oppressing Dreamers.–
This statement is a deception cloaked in a half truth. While it’s true that
Trump did rescind the Obama executive order (an action well within his lawful
powers), it’s equally true that: the Legislature (which Sanders was a seated
member of during the Obama years) failed to execute their duties under Art-1,
Sec-8, Para-4 of the Constitution; and during the Obama years, the Legislature
effectively abdicated their legislative duties in favor of an administrative
arrangement set forth by the Executive. Everyone in favor of the prior arrangement
contributed to setting the conditions necessary for this issue to rise.
SANDERS: If President Trump
believed that that Executive Order was unconstitutional, and that it needed
legislation, he could have come to Congress for a legislative solution without
holding 800,000 young people hostage by revoking their DACA status. But
President Trump chose not to do that.
1)
Trump did extend
an invitation to Congress for legislation. The House agreed of offer a
compromise. The Senate disagreed and refused to offer a compromise. As a
result, the Legislature failed to make an offer to the Executive. Everything
else is smoke and mirrors, blame and quibbling.
2)
It is a fact
that the Senate was willing to hold 2.7M government workers and 800,100
Reservists (3.3M Americans) hostage in an attempt to force the acceptance of
800,000 illegal aliens.
SANDERS: He chose to
provoke the crisis that we are experiencing today.
SAM:
Nonsense! By rescinding the Obama order, Trump brought the matter to the attention
of the Legislature; which is exactly where it belongs.
SANDERS: And that is a crisis
we have to deal with; and here in the Senate, we have to deal with it now. And let us be very clear about the nature of
this crisis.
SAM:
Yes, absolutely. Let’s be clear. – When Sanders claims there is a “crisis” he
does not mean that there is a disaster, catastrophe, or calamity. Sanders uses “crisis”
as a mechanism to demand something be done because Sanders demanded something
be done. By invoking “crisis” in this manner, Sanders is attempting to
substitute emotion and fallacy for evidence and logic. In effect, he is
attempting to preempt consideration of larger questions such as: whether the
United States is better served by immigrants who obey our laws or by those that
willfully disregard the same.
SANDERS: Because some
people say, “Well, it's really not emanate. It’s not something we have to worry
about now.” Those people are wrong.
SAM:
Sanders just demonized all peers that have an opposing position as being,
simply stated, wrong. – This is a highly illogical action for a Dreamer
champion. Sanders is setting conditions that can cause another series of filibuster-based
legislative failures.
SANDERS: As a result of
Trump’s decision, over 122 people every day are now losing their legal status.
And within a couple of years, hundreds of thousands of these young people will
have lost their legal protection and be subject to deportation. The situation
we are in right now, as a result of Trump’s action, means that if we do not
immediately protect the legal status of some 800,000 Dreamers, young people who
are brought to this country at the age of 1 or 3 or 6, young people who have
known no other home but the United States of America; let us be clear that if
we do not act and act soon these hundreds of thousands of young people could be
subject to deportation.
SAM:
Now…it’s demonization through fear. – First, his math is suspect. Assuming the
rate of 122 persons/day is true, then so is the rate of 44,530 persons/year.
Therefore, assuming rates remain relatively constant over time; those at risk
are 89,060 persons per two years. Obviously, this estimate is well below the
“hundreds of thousands” claimed. Additionally, for the claim to be true, then the
daily rate must immediately exceed 274 persons/day and remain steady for two
years. Second, his facts are likely to be biased in favor of Sanders’
progressive view. A simple Google search suggests that the 122 persons/day rate
was published in November 2017 by the Center for American Progress.[2] Because the Center for
American Progress exists to “…change the country…” through the advocacy of
progressive ideas,[3] it’s
in their interest to bias their self-sponsored polling to those ends. Third,
because Dreamers and DACA recipients are illegal aliens, it’s right and correct
for them to be at risk of identification, capture, punishment, and deportation.
Make no mistake, Dreamers are in violation of 8 USC 1325 and subject to punishment
accordingly.
SANDERS: And that means
they could be arrested outside of the home, where they have lived for virtually
their entire life, and suddenly be placed in a jail.
SAM:
Correct. Illegal aliens, because they are criminals, are at risk of
identification, capture, punishment, and deportation.
SANDERS: They could be
pulled out of a classroom where they are teaching. And there are some 20,000 DACA
recipients who are now teaching in schools all over the country. And if we do
not act and act now there could be agents going into the school pulling out teachers
right out. And arresting them. And subjecting them to deportation.
SAM:
First, and again, illegal aliens, because they are criminals, are at risk of
identification, capture, punishment, and deportation. Second, in my view,
illegal aliens have no business teaching American children. It is profoundly
unwise and immoral to normalize and make righteous the acceptance of criminal
behavior.
SANDERS: Insane as it
may sound, I suppose that the 900 DACA recipients who now serve in the United
States military today could find themselves in the position of being arrested
and deported from the country that they are putting their lives on the line to defend.
SAM:
More fear mongering. – Even Sanders doesn’t believe it.
SANDERS: And some
people say that’s farfetched. Well, I'm not so sure. It could happen. How
insane is that? But that's where we are today.
SAM:
This has now reached the heights of stupidity. – On 8 Feb 2018, Defense
Secretary Mattis stated on NPR, “They will not be subject to any kind of
deportation.” “In terms of the DACA situation ... it's clarified they are not
in any kind of jeopardy.”[4]
SANDERS: And that's
what could happen if we do not do the right thing. And this week pass
legislation, here in the Senate, to protect the Dreamers.
SAM:
Nonsense! The right thing for any Senator to do is to honor their Office by
supporting and defending the Constitution of the United States within the
consent of their State’s legislature. Given the immigration context, this means
to fully execute their Art-1, Sec-8, Para-4 duty to establish a system of
naturalization (a difficult and mindful thing) versus demonizing opposing
positions (a lazy and mindless thing).
SANDERS: Madam President,
we have a moral responsibility to stand up for the Dreamers and their families.
SAM:
More nonsense! There is no moral imperative to protect criminals from the
natural consequences of their actions. By contrast, the American government has
a moral imperative to protect the institutions of the State in a manner
agreeable to the consent of the People and the several States. Senators have a
moral duty to represent the political will of their State legislatures
according to their consent.
SANDERS: And to prevent
what will be an indelible moral stain on our country if we fail to act. I do
not want to see what the history books will be saying about this Congress if we
allow 800,000 young people to be subjected to deportation, to live in
incredible fear and anxiety.
SAM:
And…he returns to the heights of stupidity. – Senator, did you miss the DACA
spectacle this last February? Was your head attached to your body when you cast
votes?
SANDERS: But there is
the very very good news regarding the Dreamers. And it’s actually news that I a
couple of years ago I would not have believed to be possible. And that is,
Madame President, the overwhelming majority of the American people, Democrats,
Republicans, Independents absolutely agree that we must provide legal
protection for the Dreamers and that we should provide them with a path toward
citizenship.
SAM:
Stop! Sanders wants us to agree that his claim of support by “the American
people, Democrats, Republicans, Independents” is absolute (meaning…total,
unconditional, conclusive, and fixed).
SANDERS: That is not
Bernie Sanders talking. That is what the American people are saying in poll
after poll after poll.
SAM:
Alright! Now I’m excited. I’m ready to hear about nationwide polls that
recorded the preferences of every single American (they are total); and hear
that those polls demonstrate 100% alignment (they are unconditional); and hear
that the 100% result is free from bias (they are conclusive); and hear that
those positions measured have not changed over time and circumstance (they are fixed).
I am pumped!
SANDERS: Just recently
of January 20th CBS News poll found that nearly 9 out of 10 Americans, 87%
favor allowing young immigrants who entered the United States illegally as
children to remain in the United States. 87%.
SAM:
What?! Sanders just claimed that support was absolute (total, unconditional, conclusive,
and fixed), but then cited information to the contrary. – The CBS News Polls
website clearly shows that such a poll was not taken or reported on 20 Jan
2018. [5] However, there is a CBS
News article posted on 14 Jan 2018 claiming “More than eight in 10 Americans,
re-contacted for this survey after Mr. Trump's comments about U.S. immigration
from African countries and Haiti, said they had heard about them, and
three-quarters (76 percent) say the remarks were inappropriate.”[6] Unfortunately, the poll
does not clarify the polled population, or how they controlled for biases on
any sort (such as business realities that demand CBS generate revenues).
SANDERS: In Iowa, in
Vermont, and in every State in this country. Strong support for legal status
for the Dreamers and a path toward citizenship.
SAM:
Stop! Sanders did it again. – An NPR poll, reported on 6 Feb 2018, claimed that
one third of Americans are not in favor of offering a legal status to Dreamers.[7] Additionally, like CBS,
NPR is subject to its internal biases and business realities.
-
Example-1: NPR’s
strategic aspiration is to “…strengthening the cultural, civic and social fabric
of our democracy.” The claim that the American arrangement of governance is a
democracy represents a profound and fundamental failing on behalf of NPR to be
truthful. The arrangement of American governance is a constitutional republic
(rule of law) not a democracy (mob rule).
-
Example-2: One
of NPR’s strategic priorities is to increase revenues from sponsorships and
grants. This means that NPR has an interest in biasing their product towards
the desires of those investors willing to part with their money.
SANDERS: On January 11th,
at Quinnipiac poll found that 86% of Americans voters, including 76% of
Republicans, say that they want the Dreamers to remain in this country.
SAM:
Stop! I thought Sanders claimed… – The Quinnipiac poll claimed that “79 percent
of American voters” support undocumented immigrants brought to the U.S. as
children should be granted legal status.[8] Unfortunately, the poll
does not clarify the polled population, or how they controlled for biases on
any sort.
SANDERS: On February 5th,
in a Mammoth Poll, when asked about Dreamers status nearly three out of four
Americans support allowing these young people to automatically become US
citizens as long as they don't have a criminal record.
SAM:
Stop! Again… – This poll reported that, “When asked about Dreamers’ status,
nearly 3-in-4 Americans support – 49% strongly and 24% somewhat – allowing
these immigrants to automatically become U.S. citizens as long as they don’t
have a criminal record.”[9] Unlike the other polls
cited, this Monmouth sponsored poll was accomplished on 28-30 Jan 2018 with a national
random sample of 806 adults age 18 and older, in English. Unfortunately, the
poll does not clarify how they controlled for biases on any sort. – Side Note:
This poll is asking us to agree that a sampling of 806 persons (less than
0.0003% of the population) represents the consensus of Americans at large.
Really?
SANDERS: In other words,
Madam President the votes that are going to be cast hopefully today, maybe
tomorrow, are not profiles in courage. They are not members of the Senate
coming up and saying “against all the odds.” I believe that I'm going to go for
what is right.
SAM:
Stop! Sanders is claiming to know the motivations of all Senators yet to vote. While
he is in a position to suspect the intentions of other Senators, he cannot know
their intentions prior to the fact.
SANDERS: This is what
the overwhelming majority of the American people want.
SAM:
Given Sanders’ political motivations, deceptive use of questionable poll data, I
find this claim to be unreasonable and likely to be false.
SANDERS: And maybe,
just maybe, it might be appropriate to do what the American people want.
SAM:
Maybe, just maybe, it might be appropriate for Senators to support and defend
the Constitution of the United States while representing the political will of
the State’s legislatures. This is also known as “Doing Your Job.”
SANDERS: Rather than
what a handful of xenophobic extremists want.
SAM:
There it is folks…the race card! – Make no mistake about it. Sanders just
labeled anyone with an opposing position a xenophobic (chauvinistic,
intolerant, racist) extremist (radical, fanatic, terrorist). – Clearly, this is
a character attack meant to smear the intelligence, character, and goodwill of
anyone that does not walk and talk in lock-step with himself. Ironically, by
using this approach, Sanders also smeared his intelligence, character, and
goodwill towards anyone else.
SANDERS: Maybe we
should listen to the American people?
SAM:
Maybe…you should do your duty on behalf of the law abiding Americans you
represent.
SANDERS: Democrats,
Republicans, and Independents who understand that it would be a morally
atrociously thing to allow these young people to be deported.
SAM:
There it is folks…the bigot card! – Sanders just characterized failure to
address the DACA crisis as a moral atrocity (the culmination of willful acts of
violence and oppression against Dreamers).
SANDERS: And I think,
from a political perspective, about 80, 85, 90% of the American people
supporting anything in a nation which is as divided as we are today.
SAM:
Well, what is it? – It’s 80%! No, wait, it’s 85%! Or...um…90%! That sounds way
better than quoting already cited information. – Does this mean that Sanders
wants us to agree to disregard all poll data or just his cited poll data?
SANDERS: This is really
extraordinary!
SAM:
Not really. Given his history of exaggeration, it’s perfectly reasonable that he
would continue to exaggerate.
SANDERS: You can't get
80% of the American people to agree on what their favorite ice-cream is.
SAM:
Really! Are we really supposed to agree that the discharge of Senatorial duties
under the Constitution is on par with any particular citizen’s choice of their favorite
ice cream? Really!
SANDERS: But we got 80%
of the American people were saying do not turn your back on these young people
who have lived in this country for virtually their entire lives.
SAM:
Okay…so…we’re back to 80%...I guess?
SANDERS: Madam President,
we have got to act and act soon here in the Senate.
SAM:
Oh, yes…back to the crisis angle.
SANDERS: And there is
good legislation that will allow us to do that.
SAM:
Good? What makes legislation good? – Before deciding “goodness” let’s ask some
questions.
-
Why is the
answer to a failed progressive policy (the DACA order) another progressive
policy (a DACA-like law)? Why is it right to reward someone (forgiveness and
provision of citizenship) for doing something wrong (operating as a criminal
for years)? Why is the unlawful behavior of illegal aliens more politically
valuable than the lawful behavior of legal aliens? If the wrongdoing
represented by illegal aliens in the US must be rectified, then why is
detection, arrest, and deportation not a viable solution?
-
Why should
Americans agree that the natural consequence of illegal behavior is wrong in
the case of particular illegal aliens? Why should Americans fear maintaining illegal
aliens in an illegal/criminal status? Why should the quintessential American
standard, “No One is Above the Law,” be cast aside for the exclusive benefit of
illegal aliens?
SANDERS: And in the House
the good news is that there is now bipartisan legislation sponsored by Congressman
Hurd and Congressman Aguilar which will provide protection for Dreamers and a path
towards citizenship. And my understanding is that that bipartisan legislation
now has majority support.
SAM:
On 16 Jan 2018, the Rep. Hurd website reports that Representatives Will Hurd
(TX-23), Pete Aguilar (CA-31) and Jeff Denham (CA-10) introduced the Uniting
and Securing America (USA) Act (HR 4796). [10] As of 22 Jan
2018, cosponsors include (26 R’s, 27 D’s). The bill was introduced on 16 Jan 18
and sent to committees thereafter.[11] – There is no recorded
information (such as votes, procedural or otherwise, to support the claim of
“majority support.”
SANDERS: And I urge, in
the strongest terms possible, that Speaker Ryan allow democracy to prevail in
the House.
SAM:
Sanders got this one right. Ironically, our constitutional republic does
prescribe democratic processes for its legislative institutions.
SANDERS: Allow the vote
to take place. If you have a majority of members of the House, in a bipartisan
way, who support legislation, allow that legislation to come to the floor, let
the members vote their will. And if that occurs, I think the Dreamers
legislation will prevail.
SAM:
Again, a bill sponsored by 53 out of 235 seats (22%) does not equate to a
majority. Additionally, the bill has not come out of committee, debate, or
amendment processes; therefore, it’s entirely possible that the bill may become
unrecognizable to its sponsors.
Issue-2: Comprehensive Immigration Reform
SANDERS: Madam President,
we all understand that there is a need for serious debate and legislation
regarding comprehensive immigration reform.
SAM:
Here it is…the progressive Holy Grail: comprehensive immigration reform.
SANDERS: This is a
difficult issue. An issue were there are differences of opinion. A whole lot of
aspects to it. How do we provide a path toward citizenship for the 11 million
people in this country who are currently undocumented, but who are working hard,
who are raising their kids, who are obeying the law?
SAM:
Stop! Sanders just framed the significance of this issue: the legalization of
11 million new, dependent, and loyal progressives. – Don’t be fooled. These 11M
persons (illegal aliens known as unauthorized workers) prefer to reside in
California, Texas, Florida, New York, New Jersey and Illinois; Louisiana,
Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Washington.[12] All of these states are blue or transitioning from red to blue; and, when taken together, control 249 (92%) of the 270 Electoral
College votes needed to secure the Presidency. In political terms, the
progressive base of these states will expand and be augmented while opposing
positions will be further dominated and controlled.
SANDERS: What should
the overall immigration policy of our country be? How many people should be
allowed to enter this country every year? Where should they come from? All of
this is very very important and needs to be seriously debated.
SAM:
Agreed! No argument here. – Did you notice that Sanders is now playing nice?
SANDERS: But, Madame President,
that debate and that legislation is not going to be taking place in a two day
period. It's going to need some serious time, some hearings, some committee work,
before the Congress is prepared to vote on comprehensive immigration reform.
And it will not and cannot happen today or tomorrow or this week.
SAM:
Agreed! No argument here.
SANDERS: Our focus now,
as a result of Trump’s decision in September, must be on protecting the
Dreamers and there are families, and on the issue of border security.
SAM:
Nonsense! It’s entirely reasonable that your demands don’t reflect top priorities.
SANDERS: Madam
President, or Mister President,…
SAM:
Well…which one is it?
SANDERS: …there will be
important legislation coming to the floor of the Senate today or maybe
tomorrow. And I would hope that we could do the right thing, do the moral
thing, and do something that history will look back on in a very positive legislation.
Let us go forward. Let us past the Dreamers Bill.
SAM:
Stop! There is no “Dreamers Bill” being offered within the Senate. However,
Sanders may be referring to the Dream Act of 2017 (S 1615) that was commonly
referred to as the Dreamers Bill by USA Today. – Given all of his references to
mass media publications, I have to ask: who is doing his thinking for him?
Issue-3: Border Security
SANDERS: Let us deal
with border security.
SAM:
Stop! What?
SANDERS: And then, in
the near future, let us deal with comprehensive immigration reform. Thank you
and I yield the floor.
Your View
Your thoughts and perspectives are important. I invite you
to tell me what you believe with the comment section.
© 2018 – SamFrescoeProject.Blogspot.com
– All Rights Reserved
Related Posts
[1] Senator Bernie Sanders. YouTube. “The Moral Issue of
Our Time”. 14 Feb 2018. Speech on the Senate Floor. TRANSCRIPT
[3] https://www.americanprogress.org/about/mission/
(accessed 180216)
[5] https://www.cbsnews.com/feature/cbs-news-polls/
(accessed 180216)
[8] https://poll.qu.edu/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2512
(accessed 180216)
[11] https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/4796
(accessed 180216)
No comments:
Post a Comment