Posted on 05/03/2006 9:50:29 PM PDT by Jeff Head
Now you're part of the problem.
Threats will guarantee that no bill would be produced, which would be just fine with a whole lot of people. Maybe even you.
Ping!
Although it is the currently implemented (and imo, foolish) practice, it is up to Congress to dictate whether a child born of illegal aliens in the U.S. is granted citizenship or not.
In fact, American Indians who were born on reservations in the United States were not recognized as U.S. Citizens untill Congress passed a bill giving them citizenship. I think that was back around 1907.
The ball is in their court. There is nothing in the Constitution and there is no ruling by the Supreme Court preventing Congress from changing the status quo.
"Neither the Constitution nor any subsequent Supreme Court decision compels birthright citizenship to be conferred upon children of illegal aliens or of nonimmigrants born in the United States."
http://tancredo.house.gov/irc/welcome.htm
And exactly how did the roofing industry in the Southwest get that way? Are the cheaper workers actually saving consumers any money, or is it just lining the contractors pockets?
I personally belive the very first step (other than securing the border to stem the flow) is to crack down on the businesses that violate the law. Major fines in addition to criminal prosecution would take away some of the profit gained from breaking the law.
And I too believe in a guest worker program - but not as a bonus to those already here illegally. Set up a guest worker program that involves a list for workers needed, allowing exactly the number needed for the jobs open. Employers, prior to being eligible to import labor, must document the need and the efforts to fill the position with domestic workers.
Go to for your perusal:
http://grades.betterimmigration.com/testgrades.php3?District=ID&VIPID=248
IMHO we need to replace everyone on the Hill ASAP.
Yes. Section V of that amendment gives a Congress with balls the authority to enforce the provisions contained within the Fourteenth. That also means the regulation of its application exactly the way the First and Second Amendments are regulated, however, the First and Second have a provision that those rights shall not be infringed nor abridged unlike this one that clearly has made that distinction. Yet Congress sees fit to do so. So, again - it falls upon a Congress with balls, of which America has probably seen her last.
Some history, not quite what we're looking for.
http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:dgTrQtLo57AJ:www.aca.ch/hisuscit.htm+us+citizenship+1964&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=2
My understanding is that there has never been a court decision granting citizenship to the children of foreigners. There was an 'opinion', by whom I don't know, granting the rights.
A foreign ambassador whose wife has a child in the US while he is assigned here does not get the citizenship rights granted to his child but a criminal who sneaks across the border does?
I have a friend who is very knowledgable on the subject, I'll get in contact with him and brush up on it.
The Indian Citizenship Act. (1924)
http://www.usconstitution.com/IndianCitizenshipAct.htm
No strawman; if congress can be allowed to dissolve any law that becomes sticky to deal with, without being held accountable, we have no standards. Your position is surrender.
'No Bill' would be preferable to amnesty, which would be surrender to a foreign power on our own soil, and evaporation of our culture.
NOW you've made a valid point without misconstruing what my point was!!!
Jeff Head's letter hinged on the point that illegal aliens should be dealt with on the basis that they are illegal. I think that illegal aliens should be dealt with because by their past actions indicate that they are not desirable immigrants--ever.
"Holding Congress Accountable" is a great goal. Expand on that.
----
But then, you revert to misconstruing my statement.
My position is not surrender. My position is that you should base your laws on what is right and what is wrong, not make the precarious argument (as Jeff Head's letter did) that something is right or wrong based on whether it is currently defined as legal or illegal by a flippant Congress.
If you'd stop being so reactionary, you might even recognize that this is not incongruent with your position.
then hand out 400,000 green cards per year only to people who want to become Americans, and who pass a background check.
I definitely agree that intent to become a citizen or proof of citizenship needs to be a requirement to work in America post 9/11. Change green cards to "work license"that is to be issued from a any US port of entry. Make sure all licenses are in a national tracking data base for employers to check by just a phone call. Anyone who is a non-citizen will be required to get one who intends to work here. The only people who would be exempt from this would be valid visa holders.
Employers need to be held responsible for making sure that all their their employees who are non-citizens have a work license. Employers will be held liable if they fail to check the national data base to validate a license. This will cut out the possibility that more then one person will use the same license.
At this juncture, our best hope is that the illegal alien issue will ultimately do them both in.
It can't happen soon enough.
I wish we had you as our elected representative. Soneone who believes in the rule of law and can think things through.
What ever happend to "We The People" Well 65% of "We the People" want to close the boarder and deport all illegal aliens.
No, we get RINO and Liberal Senators who will sell this country down the road.
Yes, your right, I can't vote for someone who will allow this to happen
the truly beautiful part about the FairTax is that below a certain level, there is a rebate...which can force the alien to begin the process of entering the system...It penalizes those who remain here illegally, and rewards those who follow the law. I am convinced that their tax-free earnings presently, in conjunction with "free" social services fuels the problem and impedes those who might otherwise attempt to come legally
Good point here. I admit I haven't really delved into the FairTax but having to register to receive a rebate would provide an incentive for them to get on the books.
I will admit, I'm more of a flat tax proponent, but that's primarily because I haven't really done significant research into FairTax. In contrast, I've read Forbes book "Flat Tax Revolution" and found it to be a decent proposal.
I've always worried though about a point-of-sale tax which takes out of the mind of Americans what they actually pay. It's so easy to pay a bill and not realize the amount of tax which is added on. Much like health insurance and co-payments, when you take those numbers out of the daily thinking of Americans, it can be easier for FedGov to fleece us. Unless we are really vigilant.
Excellent point though...and any alternative would be better than what we have currently.
thanks for the info.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.