Bush Outlines Border Security Plan

FOX News ^ | 11/28/2005 | Wendell Goler, James Rosen

[Brian_Baldwin]

Bush Outlines Border Security Plan
Monday, November 28, 2005

CRAWFORD, Texas — Trying to unify a fractious Republican Party headed to midterm elections with wide differences over how to best deal with illegal immigration, President Bush was in Tucson, Ariz., on Monday to say America shouldn't have to choose between a welcoming society and a lawful one.

"Securing our border is essential to securing our homeland. And I want to thank all of those who are working around the clock to defend our border, to enforce our laws and to uphold the values of the United States of America. America is grateful to those on the front lines enforcing the border," Bush said at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in the first of two speeches on border control.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,176879,00.html

[RKV]

Please see also www.fairus.org...

[flashbunny]

or california:

Illegal immigration costs californians 10.5 billion annually

Or this one: Illegals Cost Feds $10 Billion a Year; Amnesty Would Nearly Triple Cost

That's just federal costs.

Now average out the state costs for florida and california, and apply it to all fifty states.

Good thing we're getting all this cheap illegal alien picked produce, otherwise we wouldn't be able to support all the costs associated with illegal immigration!

[rcocean]

First, lets secure the border.

Thats Bush's job as Commander-in-Chief under the Constitution.

We can discuss all this other stuff - afterwards

[NJ_gent]

""Anchor babies" as in UNITED STATES CITIZENS per the 14th Amendment to the UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION?"

The 14th Amendment reads in part: " All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States".

Where do you see anything about their parents' prior illegal actions being erased by the birth of the minor child? The child has the option of citizenship on his or her 18th birthday, but may not maintain both US and Mexican citizenships simultaneously. However, the parents are not US citizens, and are in fact still criminal aliens. As such, they can be deported. The child, being in the custody of the parents, could legally be sent to a state-run facility for those without suitable and available parents, or could (at the option of the parents) be sent with them to their country of origin.

That seems a far more reasonable course of action than to allow criminal aliens to further their criminal actions (remaining in the United States illegally) simply because they've stayed hidden long enough to spawn an anchor.

[clawrence3]

Sure - but do you that most of the world's cement is committed to China right now?

[hillary's_fat_a**]

Why can't we build a 10 meter high concrete wall ...

We could even have Mexican illegals build it on the cheap! ROFLMBO!

[putupjob]

I see Bush is now thanking all those working on border security. ???? That would be the Minutemen??? He called them vigilantes not long ago.

Next year I'm sending NOTHING to the GOP. I'll make my contributions to the Minutemen, maybe Tancredo, and other conservative organizations such as the NRA. Tancredo is the only main stream politician I'll consider sending anything to.

[cripplecreek]

Yep. We have laws on the books that aren't being enforced. There's no reason to believe that new laws will be enforced any better.

[clawrence3]

I'm not talking about just taxes paid by illegal immigrants (Social Security though is getting a huge windfall by not having to pay those back out in benefits) - the bigger impact is on the economy as a whole - I have not seen a single study on that.

[TruthShallSetYouFree]

I rest my case. Kudos that those MS 13 guys haven't scared you off the jogging trail. You are either really brave, really fast, or carrying something other than an I-Pod with you. :)

[ndt]

"They are not a US citizen. There is no law giving them citizenship. Only a mis-reading of the 14th amendment by liberal judges."

Well lets look at it shall we.....

"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside."

So, how does that NOT apply to a child born of illegal immigrants? Unless you think that they are not subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S.,in other words are not bound by the law. If they are not bound by the law, then they are not really illegal aliens now are they :)

[jwh_Denver]

From Tom Tancredo's newsletter 11/22

A Move to Deny Citizenship to U.S.-born Kids of Illegal Immigrants

By LISA HOFFMAN
Scripps Howard News Service
November 17, 2005



WASHINGTON - Some call them "anchor babies," and, in a corner of Congress, there is new sentiment to unmoor them.



At issue are children born in the United States to illegal immigrants. Based on longstanding constitutional interpretation, such babies are automatically American citizens by virtue of their place of birth.



In the House, a group of immigration hard-liners thinks this precept that has been around for a century and a half is a detriment to the nation because, they say, it can serve as a magnet for undocumented people to slip across the border and bear children. Such offspring can eventually serve as the "anchor" that other family members may use to gain citizenship themselves.



According to this point of view, many pregnant women, or young couples of childbearing age, may decide to try to get to U.S. soil so the children will reap American citizenship and the opportunities and benefits that go with it.



And once the children reach age 21, they can begin to sponsor family members to legally immigrate. To Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., and others on a House immigration task force, that effectively rewards those who break immigration laws.



Citizenship "should not be bestowed on people who are the children of folks who come into this country illegally," Tancredo said.



But critics of doing away with what is sometimes called "birthright citizenship" say the constitutional provision has actually been a boon for the United States, one of the few countries in the world to grant such immediate status.



By embracing all babies at birth as Americans, the nation has avoided the societal unrest that has festered in France, where even the French-born children of Arab and other legal immigrants do not automatically become citizens until they reach 18.



Resentment and discrimination from that segregated status is blamed for contributing to the rage that exploded into riots in recent weeks across France.



"It has served us well by giving (everyone born in the United States) the sense of belonging from day one," said Demetrios Papademetriou, president of the Migration Policy Institute in Washington. "It's how we built our country."



He also questioned how much of a motivation the citizenship anchor is in driving people to enter the United States illegally. Most who do come are looking for work, and are unlikely to be making the calculation that, in 21 years, their children can be their ticket to legal status, he said.



"The vast majority of people have much more immediate concerns in mind," Papademetriou said.



There are no certain numbers for how many babies are born to undocumented mothers in America each year. Estimates range from about 100,000 to 300,000.

The underpinning of the inclusive policy is the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, which says, in part: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States."

Ratified in 1868, the amendment was designed to extend birthright citizenship to blacks, but has been interpreted ever since to apply to everyone born in the United States.



In the past two decades, as concerns over illegal immigration have grown, some in Congress have taken stabs at changing the birthright guarantee.

The last time the issue surfaced was in 1993, but efforts at reform were weakened when the Justice Department advised that it would take a constitutional amendment - with ratification by three-quarters of the states - to accomplish it.



Now, the House lawmakers are exploring whether there are legislative avenues they could follow short of such an amendment. This approach is based on an interpretation that the 14th Amendment itself gives Congress the right to enforce its provisions legislatively.



The U.S. Supreme Court "has held that Congress has some power to define the substance of the rights that are protected under the amendment and may even, under some circumstances, legislate contrary to judicial decisions," the Congressional Research Service wrote in a November report for Congress on the legal underpinnings of the birthright guarantee.

[Ol' Dan Tucker]

I'm not talking about just taxes paid by illegal immigrants (Social Security though is getting a huge windfall by not having to pay those back out in benefits) - the bigger impact is on the economy as a whole - I have not seen a single study on that.

Aren't very familiar with Bush's Social Security Totalization Agreement with Mexico, are you?

Signed in June, 2004.

Give Mexican illegal aliens unprecidented access to our US SSA. Their wives and kids, too. (Even if they've never been to America)

[NJ_gent]

"A wall doesn't do the job? Lets see, if you make it high enough, it sure as heck makes the job a whole lot tougher than the way it is now. Curious that folks really don't want to try something that may work."

You misunderstand me. First of all, a concrete wall that's 100 feet high will still have people going through it, under it, around it, and yes, even over it. As I said previously, I think the Israelis have the right idea; a comprehensive solution including a fence/wall. Manned and unmanned patrols must be constant, and internal enforcement must also be tough. Make it difficult enough that only 1 in a hundred who try to cross the border illegally succeed, and only 1 in a hundred will try. Make it so that the coyotees (well armed alien smugglers) quickly find themselves hopelessly outmanned and outgunned wherever and whenever they attempt to get their cargo across the border.

[RKV]

I already provided a reference on the subject of the net impact as a whole. Please see my post to you (#61) by the National Academy of Sciences. Also, on the subject of Social Security, you have read about the Social Security Totalization Agreement with Mexico haven't you? There are no savings there to be had.

[clawrence3]

I disagree with altering the 14th Amendment in any way.

[devane617]

Deport W along with all the other illegals. Problem solved...

[Centurion2000]

bump

[MassachusettsGOP]

Yeah, as long as Nathan Deal's bill passes, I think these programs could work. But since his bill likely wont pass, these programs therefore probably wont work.