How Many More "Anchor Babies" Can We Support

[britbrat1961]

<p>So, for those of you that don’t live on a border state, just how do you think this affects you?</p>

<p>I am appalled by the number of women who are coming across the southern border, deliver a child and then stay here for the US government (our tax dollars) to: </p>

<li>Pay for the delivery and the medical costs for the child until 18</li>
<li>Educate the child and his/her future siblings until 18</li>
<li>Support the mother and child with welfare for who knows how long</li>
</ol>

<p>And THEN…the polititians who have a “caring, kind heart” say that you cant sent the mother back to Mexico when she is illegal because she has a child who is a US citizen,…so “what to do”? Some of them propose to give the mother legal status and then let her immediate family join her (also illegals) ie. her Mother, Father, Grandparents, siblings, etc.</p>

<p>So, as the result of 1 “anchor baby”, we get 10 to 12 more illegal immigrants?</p>

<p>And we wonder why our assistance programs are being strained? Our education is suffering? When a teacher cannot send 3rd grade homework home because noone at home speaks, reads, or understands English…that is a shame.</p>

<p>It is not just an issue of people wanting to come to the US for a better life. I absolutely embrace that IF they pay taxes, contribute to the economy, and do their best to respect and live the culture of the country that they live in…the USA!!</p>

<p>Many here demand that their children are taught school in their native tongue, work for cash and wire it all back to Mexico while receiving assistance, free health care, etc. etc. </p>

<p>The illegal day workers that stand on the street corner in my Southern California city demand $12.00 per hour plus lunch and transportation. This is to mow a lawn or paint a fence, or help unload lumber for a project, etc.</p>

<p>Those of us who live in a border state feel it every day. My hopes are that those of you who do not live with it every day, please research before you vote for the next President, how they propose to get the “illegal alien” issue into check.</p>

<p>GOD BLESS THE USA!!!</p>

[silvervestersmom]

<p>It’s a tough call. I have a DIL whose family was kicked out of Uganda. One uncle who lives in TX brought in her and her family. Now there are 50 family members living here. Every adult is a legal immigrant and hard working, entrepreneurial , contributing taxes and brainpower. The children are in public schools and universities earning doctorates. They have a very strong culture of family supporting family.</p>

<p>I have seen horrific poverty in Mexico. I’ve been told that births to the poorest families are not even recorded. I have seen small children spend entire days on little islands in the middle of traffic, begging with their parents at stop lights while siblings are working their squeegees. If I were in those straits I would try my hardest to come to the U.S. so my children could have a better life.</p>

<p>As the daughter of an immigrant I have been grateful every day to have been born here. I think my family is just lucky that it was easier to immigrate some decades ago.</p>

[britbrat1961]

<p>Yes, and the key to your point is that the people you speak of are LEGAL and contributing. I realize that large families are a part of the Catholic, Hispanic culture but the Mexican government encourages them to come here instead of looking to how they can help their own people.</p>

<p>I am a legal resident alien. My step-father was in the USAF and I have had a SS card since I was 8 years old. I have paid my taxes, worked and contributed and have 3 sons who are citizens because they were born here to an American father and a LEGAL resident alien mother.</p>

<p>I would love to become an American Citizen and am trying to get through the process, but I have to stand in line behind 14 Million others who came here illegally and are doing the same thing. </p>

<p>Yes it is a tough call, but how many of our own people are we willing to sacrifice to poverty if we don’t have a good immigration policy?</p>

[razorsharp]

<p>With this current Congress, showing compassion is far more important that using common sense. It’s not just anchor babies that are the problem. Those with AIDS will now be allowed to come into America and get free medical care for the rest of their lives when they refuse to leave. But it’s ok, we will just borrow it from future generations like we do everything else.</p>

[anothermom2]

<p>I won’t say where I stand on the immigration issue, since it is too complex for this forum. However, I would like to point out that day workers are in the east too. I can tell you where… The local authorities cast a blind eye.</p>

<p>Not necessarily true re: easier to immigrate decades ago. Have we forgotten that there was the need for a guarantor for many immigrants so that they would not become a burden to the government? Quotas? Of course there were fewer entitlements…</p>

[sueinphilly]

<p>easy to fix. Just don’t grant automatic US citizen status to any baby born in this country. Won’t ever happen, but that would solve that problem.</p>

[zoosermom]

<p>I totally agree with sueinphilly. That would be such a sensible fix and address the labor issues.</p>

[britbrat1961]

<p>Agreed! And, I believe that one of the European countries has a policy that goes something like this. </p>

<p>If you have a baby there and want to become a citizen or the baby be a citizen, the mother has to work for 10 years, prove that she has contributed to the country’s economy, paid taxes, has medical insurance, etc. etc., and then can petition for citizenship for she and the child.</p>

<p>Accountablilty anyone?</p>

[momof2inca]

<p>I would need to see some figures before I comment. Is this problem growing, declining (due to our worse economy) about the same as always?</p>

[owlice]

<p>That “fix” would take a Constitutional amendment. </p>

<p>

Natural-born citizen</p>

<p>Who is a natural-born citizen? Who, in other words, is a citizen at birth, such that that person can be a President someday?</p>

<p>The 14th Amendment defines citizenship this way: “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.” But even this does not get specific enough. As usual, the Constitution provides the framework for the law, but it is the law that fills in the gaps.</p>

<p>Currently, Title 8 of the U.S. Code fills in those gaps. Section 1401 defines the following as people who are “citizens of the United States at birth:”</p>

<pre><code>* Anyone born inside the United States

• Any Indian or Eskimo born in the United States, provided being a citizen of the U.S. does not impair the person’s status as a citizen of the tribe
• Any one born outside the United States, both of whose parents are citizens of the U.S., as long as one parent has lived in the U.S.
• Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year and the other parent is a U.S. national
• Any one born in a U.S. possession, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year
• Any one found in the U.S. under the age of five, whose parentage cannot be determined, as long as proof of non-citizenship is not provided by age 21
• Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is an alien and as long as the other parent is a citizen of the U.S. who lived in the U.S. for at least five years (with military and diplomatic service included in this time)
• A final, historical condition: a person born before 5/24/1934 of an alien father and a U.S. citizen mother who has lived in the U.S.
  </code></pre>

<p>Anyone falling into these categories is considered natural-born, and is eligible to run for President or Vice President. These provisions allow the children of military families to be considered natural-born, for example.</p>

<p>Separate sections handle territories that the United States has acquired over time, such as Puerto Rico (8 USC 1402), Alaska (8 USC 1404), Hawaii (8 USC 1405), the U.S. Virgin Islands (8 USC 1406), and Guam (8 USC 1407). Each of these sections confer citizenship on persons living in these territories as of a certain date, and usually confer natural-born status on persons born in those territories after that date. For example, for Puerto Rico, all persons born in Puerto Rico between April 11, 1899, and January 12, 1941, are automatically conferred citizenship as of the date the law was signed by the President (June 27, 1952). Additionally, all persons born in Puerto Rico on or after January 13, 1941, are natural-born citizens of the United States. Note that because of when the law was passed, for some, the natural-born status was retroactive.</p>

<p>The law contains one other section of historical note, concerning the Panama Canal Zone and the nation of Panama. In 8 USC 1403, the law states that anyone born in the Canal Zone or in Panama itself, on or after February 26, 1904, to a mother and/or father who is a United States citizen, was “declared” to be a United States citizen. Note that the terms “natural-born” or “citizen at birth” are missing from this section.

</p>

<p>Source: [Constitutional</a> Topic: Citizenship - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net](<a href=“http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_citi.html]Constitutional”>Constitutional Topic: Citizenship - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net)</p>

[britbrat1961]

<p>Good point! What I see in my area of SoCal is a lot of forclosures and empty apartments and condos that were occupied by the illegal aliens. In the neighborhood that we sold our house 3 years ago, the 4 bedroom house was immediately turned into a 7 bedroom and 15 people were living there at last count.</p>

<p>The person who bought the house was a legal alien that bought it on “stated income” meaning that they put a number on the mortgage app that was inflated because 4 families were going to contribute their cash to the monthly mortgage payment and they had good credit, so the income was never varified. I know this because I know the Real Estate agent that dealt with the buyers. </p>

<p>Now that the 4 families that were living there do not have jobs mowing lawns and doing remodel construction, they have all gone to other areas to find work and have left the owner “holding the bag” with a HUGE ballooned mortgage payment. </p>

<p>Also, it is a known fact that in the San Diego area there is a huge problem with young girls coming across the border when the Navy ships are in port and the sailors have 2 or 3 days leave. They literally try to sleep with as many men as they can to get pregnant and then they hope for a guarantee to stay here. The desperation is SO sad to me, but we unfortunately make it too easy to do. Some of these people are very honest and hard, hard workers, and others are just “working the system”!!</p>

[sueinphilly]

<p>that pesky constitution :-)</p>

<p>[Anchor</a> babies - children born in the United States to illegal alien mothers - THE AMERICAN RESISTANCE FOUNDATION](<a href=“http://www.theamericanresistance.com/issues/anchor_babies.html]Anchor”>Anchor babies - children born in the United States to illegal alien mothers - THE AMERICAN RESISTANCE FOUNDATION)</p>

<p>The original intent of the 14th Amendment was clearly not to facilitate illegal aliens defying U.S. law at taxpayer expense. Current estimates indicate there may be over 300,000 anchor babies born each year in the U.S., thus causing illegal alien mothers to add more to the U.S. population each year than immigration from all sources in an average year before 1965.</p>

[owlice]

<p>From my previously-cited page:</p>

<p>

In 2008, when Arizona Senator John McCain ran for president on the Republican ticket, some theorized that because McCain was born in the Canal Zone, he was not actually qualified to be president. However, it should be noted that section 1403 was written to apply to a small group of people to whom section 1401 did not apply. McCain is a natural-born citizen under 8 USC 1401(c): “a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents both of whom are citizens of the United States and one of whom has had a residence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions, prior to the birth of such person.”

</p>

<p>“The American Resistance Foundation” – ah, such a neutral source of information! Try here instead: [US</a> CODE: Title 8,1401. Nationals and citizens of United States at birth](<a href=“8 U.S. Code § 1401 - Nationals and citizens of United States at birth | U.S. Code | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute”>8 U.S. Code § 1401 - Nationals and citizens of United States at birth | U.S. Code | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute)</p>

[mommusic]

<p>sueinphilly and others–In some European countries children of immigrants are not automatically citizens. This does not keep them from having children, it merely creates a large sub-class of people who are not citizens and have no stake in the country or reason to feel loyal to it.</p>

[madville]

<p>

Just don’t grant automatic US citizen status to any baby born in this country. Won’t ever happen, but that would solve that problem.

</p>

<p>Agreed. Sue, is that really you!</p>

[Mr_Payne]

<p>

Just don’t grant automatic US citizen status to any baby born in this country. Won’t ever happen, but that would solve that problem.

You are removing a large potential voting bloc for the left. It won’t happen.</p>

[collegealum314]

<p>

sueinphilly and others–In some European countries children of immigrants are not automatically citizens. This does not keep them from having children, it merely creates a large sub-class of people who are not citizens and have no stake in the country or reason to feel loyal to it.

</p>

<p>Regardless, anchor babies are a route to citizenship. I have a hard time believing that this incentive does not encourage potential illegal immigrants to have babies in the U.S.</p>

[sueinphilly]

<p>IMO, if the immigrants (mostly mexican?) that come here to give birth KNEW that weren’t going to get FREE health care and whatever else they get for FREE, then I bet alot of them wouldn’t take the trouble to come here.</p>

<p>I’m not anti-immigrant. I’m anti-freeloaders. We have enough people here already that require government assistance. No need to encourage more to come. </p>

<p>The immigrants that came to this country from its inception until the past 20+ years ago, didn’t get the ‘help’ that people do now. 3 of my 4 grandparents came from eastern Europe before WWI. No freebies. They worked their asses off and raise a family during the depression.</p>

[Bay]

<p>There is still an argument/loophole, that has not been addressed by the Courts, that refutes the citizenship status of “anchor babies.” Section 1401 actually says…</p>

<p>

The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:
(a) a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof;

</p>

<p>There is an unaddressed argument that these babies are not subject to the “jurisdiction” of the U.S., as their parents are not legally recognized as residents here. Yes, I know it sounds ephemeral, but it has never been addressed. If anyone has anything that refutes this, I would be interested to read it.</p>

<p>(Btw, babies born here to foreign embassadors are NOT considered U.S. citizens, by virtue of this language.)</p>