A FReeper's Guide To Immigration Reform

(FR Open Border Opinion Poll captured on 13 Feb, 2005 at 10:00 PM EST)

Free Republic Opinion Poll: Please indicate whether or not you support or oppose open borders and illegal immigration.

Composite Opinion
I OPPOSE open borders and illegal immigration.	94.4%	4,020
I SUPPORT open borders and illegal immigration.	2.9%	125
Undecided/Pass.	2.7%	115
	100.0%	4,260

Member Opinion
I OPPOSE open borders and illegal immigration.	94.3%	2,954
Undecided/Pass.	3.4%	105
I SUPPORT open borders and illegal immigration.	2.3%	73
	100.0%	3,132

Non-Member Opinion
I OPPOSE open borders and illegal immigration.	94.5%	1,066
I SUPPORT open borders and illegal immigration.	4.6%	52
Undecided/Pass.	0.9%	10
	100.0%	1,128

Up from Ecuador via the Mexican Border - Is Zarqawi Planning U.S. Hit?

Arrests raise air-safety concerns (Company used illegal immigrants for aircraft maintenance.)

Thunder on the Border-- (Minuteman Project) various FR links & stories

Firsthand reports from days 5 and 6 of Minuteman Project

Great summary! I live in one of those areas and I certainly understand MY anger!

Flight Plans? DHS May Resume Airlifting Mexican Illegals Back Home

Gingrich urges action against illegals

Clinton calls for creation of new border security position

"...They [illegals] are cut off from their families far away, fearing if they leave our country to visit relatives back home they might never be able to return to their jobs.

The situation I described is wrong. It is not the American way."

George Bush, crying into his hankerchief over his precious illegals.

According to this man, stopping illegals at the border is "wrong" and "not the American way", and those who do so are uneeded "vigalantes".

Myths and lies of illegal immigration

America's Anchor Baby Syndrome

Each year, thousands of women enter the United States illegally to give birth, knowing that their child will thus have U.S. citizenship. Their children immediately qualify for a slew of federal, state, and local benefit programs. In addition, when the children turn 21, they can sponsor the immigration of other relatives, becoming "anchor babies" for an entire clan.

Interpreting the 14th Amendment

"In 1994, Alma Meza Guitierrez traveled hundreds of miles with her three year old son through Mexico and across the U.S. border in order to reach her aunt and uncle’s small apartment in San Diego. She lives in squalid conditions in the apartment’s kitchen, she does not speak English and has little prospects for employment. Why would a 20-year-old mother of one give up her life in Mexico to endure such circumstances? Alma is pregnant and she, like thousands of other women who enter the United States illegally each year, knows that giving birth in the U.S. means her child will be an’anchor baby’ and granted U..S. citizenship. For Alma, that means her child will immediately qualify for a slew of federal, state and local benefit programs. In addition, when Alma’s child turns 21,he can sponsor the immigration of other members of the Guitierrez clan."

"Born In the USA,"
San Diego Union-Tribune, February 20,1994

The United States is unusual in its offer of citizenship to anyone born on its soil. Only a few European countries still grant automatic citizenship at birth. The United Kingdom and Australia repealed their U.S.-style policies in the 1980s after witnessing abuses similar to those plaguing the U.S. today.¹

Why does the United States continue to allow a practice subject to widespread abuse? The answer lies in how American courts have interpreted the 14th Amendment to the Constitution.

The 14th Amendment was added to the Constitution as part of the post-Civil War reforms aimed at addressing injustices to African Americans. It states that "all persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the United States" and was crafted so that state governments could never deny citizenship to blacks born in the United States. But at the time, the United States had no immigration policy, and thus the authors saw no need to state that explicitly.

The phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" was intended to exclude from automatic citizenship American-born persons whose allegiance to the United States was not complete. In the case of illegal aliens who are temporarily or unlawfully in the United States, because their native country has a claim of allegiance on the child, the completeness of the allegiance to the United States is impaired and logically precludes automatic citizenship.

The Price We Pay

"Every Person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons."

Senator Jacob Howard,
co-author of the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment, 1866.

"The present guarantee under American law of automatic birthright citizenship to the children of illegal aliens can operate...as one more incentive to illegal migration and violation by nonimmigrant aliens already here [.] When this attraction is combined with the powerful lure of the expanded entitlements conferred upon citizen children and their families by the modern welfare state, the total incentive effect of birthright citizenship may well become significant."

Profs. Peter Schuck and
Rogers Smith,
"Consensual Citizenship,"
Chronicles, July 1992.

The Urban Institute estimates that the cost of educating illegal alien children in the nation’s seven states with the highest concentration of illegal aliens was $3.1 billion in 1993 (which, with the growth of their population to 1.3 million, would be more like $5 billion in 2000). This estimate does not take into account the additional costs of bilingual education or other special educational needs.

FAIR estimates there are currently between 287,000 and 363,000 children born to illegal aliens each year. This figure is based on the crude birth rate of the total foreign-born population (33 births per 1000) and the size of the illegal alien population (between 8.7 and 11 million). In 1994, California paid for 74,987 deliveries to illegal alien mothers, at a total cost of $215.2 million (an average of $2,842 per delivery). Illegal alien mothers accounted for 36 percent of all Medi-Cal funded births in California that year.

What Does This Mean?

Higher Taxes: The federal government has control over immigration law for the United States. By not addressing this abuse, the funds that state and local governments must provide to anchor babies amounts to a virtual tax on U.S. citizens to subsidize illegal aliens.

Disrespect for the rule of law: By not closing this loophole, Congress in effect rewards law-breakers and punishes those who have chosen to follow the rules and immigrate legally.

Congressional action warranted: The 14th Amendment stipulates that Congress has the power to enforce its provisions by enactment of legislation, and the power to enforce a law is necessarily accompanied by the authority to interpret that law. Therefore, an act of Congress stating its interpretation of the 14th Amendment, as not to include the offspring of illegal aliens, would fall within Congress's prerogative.

On June 11, 2004 Irish voters voted in a national referendum to end automatic citizenship for any child born in Ireland regardless of the parents’ residence status. Ireland was the last member of the European Union to allow pregnant foreigners to gain residence and welfare benefits as a result of birth in the country. Seattle Post Intelligencer, June 13, 2004.

Updated 6/04

SOURCE

Illegal aliens threaten U.S. medical system: a hidden cost of illegal immigration

ACLU Engaging in Criminal Activity; Aiding Illegal Aliens Entering U.S. and Smoking Dope

Why The ACLU Hates The Minuteman Project

America's Anchor Baby Syndrome

The UnConstitutionality of Citizenship by Birth to Non-Americans

Illegals becoming more violent against Border Patrol

Dear Mr. President,

I voted for you twice but I would not even consider voting for you again (if you could run for a third term) unless you do a 180 degree turn on immigration. Your stance on amnesty for illegal aliens is in direct contrast to the 80% of American citizens who oppse it.

Respectfully,
JarheadFromFlorida

George Bush, crying into his hankerchief over his precious illegals. According to this man, stopping illegals at the border is "wrong" and "not the American way", and those who do so are uneeded "vigalantes".

Nice thread. Whiners of the World Unite!

Illegals becoming more violent against Border Patrol

Congressional call for troops on border