{"id":6672,"date":"2014-05-16T14:30:55","date_gmt":"2014-05-16T18:30:55","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/live-immigrationreform.pantheonsite.io\/?p=6672"},"modified":"2018-12-28T15:00:45","modified_gmt":"2018-12-28T20:00:45","slug":"inequality-and-immigration-revisited","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/2014\/05\/16\/inequality-and-immigration-revisited\/","title":{"rendered":"Inequality and Immigration Revisited"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"money\"Buried in a Bloomberg View item by Megan McArdle<\/a> about income inequality and the upcoming election is this sentence:<\/p>\n

“Of those 100 districts [with the most income inequality], I count\u00a0just 30 that are represented by Republicans; these are heavily concentrated in Florida and Texas, where immigrants are likely to make up a lot of the bottom. Because many of those immigrants can\u2019t vote, a challenger will have a hard time making a run on the inequality issue in those districts.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

By contrast, McArdle notes that 32 of the 35 Congressional districts with the most inequality are represented by Democrats.<\/p>\n

FAIR issued a report last year on income inequality<\/a> that explains the rise in inequality is due in large part to our immigration policy.<\/p>\n

It appears that trying to use inequality as a campaign issue presents two problems for Democrats. First, many of the districts with the highest inequality already have Democratic representatives, and second, their preferred immigration policy increases inequality.