The Dream Act, which provides a path to citizenship for those children who were brought to the United States illegally by their parents, passed the House by 216-198 this week, but will likely die in the Senate for lack of bipartisan support. Democrats knew they have no chance of passing the Dream Act, but tried to force the issue to a vote so they could hammer home their message to Hispanics: Democrats are your friends; Republicans are not. When it became clear Thursday they didn't have the votes in the Senate to block a Republican filibuster, they tabled the measure.
It was pure cynicism on the part of Democrats, who have done little to advance immigration reform in the two years they've controlled both Congress and the White House. But Republicans may, nonetheless, be walking right into their trap.
For all the loose talk of "amnesty" in the immigration debate, proposals to grant a path to legalization for adult immigrants who entered or remained in the United State illegally were never true amnesty. The Bush plan included hefty fines for all transgressors -- which, by definition, is not amnesty -- as well as requiring them to pay back taxes, undergo criminal checks, learn English, and go to the back of the citizenship line. As conservative blogger Jennifer Rubin notes, the definition of amnesty is to "exempt from punishment."
But the Dream Act is amnesty in the most meritorious sense. Many of those eligible to participate came as babes in arms or as young children. While their parents committed a civil offense -- not a criminal one, as many people seem, wrongly, to believe -- the kids had no choice in the matter. Nonetheless, this amnesty would not be automatic; it would be earned. Only those who successfully completed at least two years of college or military service would be eligible-and they would have to demonstrate good moral character.
Do Republicans really want to tell young people who've lived here most of their lives, who may speak no other language but English, and who are even willing to sacrifice themselves on the battlefield for the protection of all Americans: "We don't want you"?
What are the alternatives -- let them continue to live in the shadows or deport them? Not even the most aggressively anti-immigration groups are calling for the latter.
A number of Republicans who previously supported the legislation -- including one of its chief authors, Sen. Orrin Hatch -- have decided it is too risky to vote for it now. But the real risk is to the future of the Republican Party.
Republicans should have hoisted the Democrats on their own petards by passing the Dream Act. This is not about border security -- which is much improved. There are fewer illegal immigrants coming into the United States now than at any point in almost 40 years, according to the Department of Homeland Security. This is largely a symbolic issue -- only about a million of the nearly 12 million illegal immigrants in the country would be eligible to benefit from the Dream Act because of the education and other requirements of the bill.
But it is important symbolism. It says to these stateless children, in the words of Ezekiel, "The son will not bear the punishment for the father's iniquity." It also says to the more than 35 million Hispanics who are U.S. citizens or legal residents, Republicans have a heart and don't want to punish those who've done everything in their power to serve the only country they've known as home.
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich recently called for a "zone between deportation and amnesty" for illegal immigrants, which would allow them to work in the country. Gingrich is a rock-hard conservative, but he recognizes that the hard-line that has come to dominate the GOP's stance on immigration poses problems for the future of the party, and he's recently launched an outreach to Hispanics. That zone should encompass a path to legalization for the most worthy among illegal immigrants.
The refusal of all but a tiny handful of Republicans to vote for the Dream Act will become a future nightmare. Hard-line anti-illegal immigrant rhetoric has already cost Republicans at least two U.S. Senate seats, Nevada and Colorado, even in a GOP landslide election. It could well cost Republicans the White House in 2012 -- the Democrats are betting on it.
Showing posts with label Anchore Babies: Immigrations. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Anchore Babies: Immigrations. Show all posts
Friday, December 10, 2010
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
Outlaw Anchor Babies
The Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution states, in part: "...
Section 1.
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. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Passed in 1868, the purpose of that law was to ensure that all free blacks, whether former slaves or not, were entitled to U.S. citizenship, as were their children.
Good intentions gone awry.
Boy, has that been used and abused. Had the lawmakers known what would lie ahead in the 20th and 21st centuries, with babies by the millions being birthed by illegals on American soil in order to gain entry through the back door, the wording would have been much different.
What do we do about it? Little.
In a period of ten years, four million illegal alien mothers who happen to give birth within our borders will be providing automatic American citizenship to their child, skirting immigration laws via an unintended loophole. In the majority of those cases, the taxpayer will be assuming the responsibilities of feeding, clothing, educating and providing for health care. I hesitate to mention the cost of criminal activity, victimization, court costs and prisons costs; because we all know that a significant percentage of those will unfortunately go that route.
The system for making children into American citizens is widely known throughout the world. Just get here pregnant, and then have the baby. Voila. They not only do it from Mexico, but all other nations, including from mid-east countries where Islam - peaceful and non-peaceful - is being imported in huge numbers. They are among the millions who are destined to significantly alter the demographic landscape of America in future decades.
Yes. I know all Muslims are not bad people. But, unfortunately, too many are associated with the Jihad movement, which makes this a national security threat to the U.S.
It is so well known and accepted, that one Turkish-owned hotel in New York City, the Marmara Manhattan, has been marketed with "birth tourism packages" to expectant mothers abroad. Talk about brazen. Legal or illegal immigrants are welcomed in order to super-populate this country with outside cultures (and religions) via the 14th amendment loophole which makes children automatic citizens. And in doing so, special immigration status is bestowed upon the parents who would otherwise be illegal because...after all...a baby must be with its mother and/or father.
The nation's school systems alone, which are over burdened and funds poor, face the economic burden of providing education to millions of children born "legally" of "Illegal" parents in America. Those cost burdens, which includes adapting to languages other than English, deplete from quality educational opportunities for the children of legal American families who work here and pay taxes.
In 2004, a study was conducted in three states regarding their annual costs of educating anchor baby children. Estimates ranged $87 million in Pennsylvania, to over one billion dollars in Texas. Then, there's California.
At present, there are approximately 4.7 million children of illegal immigrants in our public schools systems.
It's almost impossible to estimate the health, feeding and housing costs associated with a half million anchor babies born each year, or the future costs of criminal activity which - considering the absence of family stability - a significant percentage of them will engage in.
This is just another facet of the runaway immigration dilemma that is costing the taxpayer billions. Yet, the only answer our politicians can come up with is Comprehensive Immigration Reform, which is nothing more than a euphemism for "Amnesty." Such reform would not save one dime of the cost problems.
What can be done about anchor babies and hotels like the Marmara Manhattan? Rep. Dan Burton of Indiana has proposed HR5002, which is a bill proposed to put the kabash, requiring one parent of a child born here to be an American citizen or legal alien. The bill is still in committee. (Don't hold your breath) Here is a summary:
4/13/2010--Introduced.
No Sanctuary for Illegals Act - Directs the Secretary of Homeland Security (DHS) to: (1) increase border patrol recruitment incentives by offering a ($40,000 maximum) repayment of higher education loans; and (2) develop border patrol retention incentives through the establishment of a retention program. Authorizes the Secretary to deploy newly developed technologies to secure U.S. international land and maritime borders. Directs the Secretary to: (1) prioritize border fence construction; and (2) report to Congress regarding such construction's progress. Requires that if an alien who is unlawfully present in the United States is arrested for any offense by a state or local law enforcement agency the head of such agency shall immediately notify United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) of the arrest and the alien's identity. Requires that such an arrested alien be detained by ICE and presented before an immigration judge for expedited U.S. removal without release from detention and without further hearing or review. Provides for criminal penalties and expedited removal for such a removed alien who subsequently returns unlawfully to the United States. Amends the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) to make inadmissible an alien who has been unlawfully present in the United States for any period of time and who enters or seeks to enter the United States unlawfully. (Current law requires the period of unlawful presence to be more than one year.)
Amends INA to consider a person born in the United States "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States for citizenship at birth purposes if the person is born in the United States of parents, one of whom is: (1) a U.S. citizen or national; (2) a lawful permanent resident alien whose residence is in the United States; or (3) an alien performing active service in the U.S. Armed Forces. Prohibits a federal government officer or employee from providing federal funds to any state or political subdivision that is determined to be interfering with efforts to enforce federal immigration laws. Terminates such prohibition when the state or political subdivision enters into an agreement with the Secretary to cease such interference.
There are two ways to invade a country. From outside and from within. Japan did it from outside. So did Radical Islam...for which we are still at war. The more difficult war, is fighting the invasion from within, because it's subtle and ill-defined, yet just as powerful and effective. The insiders need only to be more patient.
Besides Europe and Canada, I don't see many other countries who are at risk of losing their culture before the end of this century. But we sure are.
We cannot accommodate all the poor and oppressed in the entire world. If we do, there will be no America the Beautiful in future generations. And, the children of our grandkids will never know how great this nation once was.
But...who cares? Right?
For a stark view of the immigration issue by the numbers, check this out:
http://immigrationcounter.com/ This is a real time counter of immigrant activity in the U.S.
More cost factors by the Center for Immigration Studies:
http://cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalexec.html
And More Links:
http://www.fairus.org/site/PageServer?pagename=iic_immigrationissuecenters4608
http://www.voiac.org/
Section 1.
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. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Passed in 1868, the purpose of that law was to ensure that all free blacks, whether former slaves or not, were entitled to U.S. citizenship, as were their children.
Good intentions gone awry.
Boy, has that been used and abused. Had the lawmakers known what would lie ahead in the 20th and 21st centuries, with babies by the millions being birthed by illegals on American soil in order to gain entry through the back door, the wording would have been much different.
What do we do about it? Little.
In a period of ten years, four million illegal alien mothers who happen to give birth within our borders will be providing automatic American citizenship to their child, skirting immigration laws via an unintended loophole. In the majority of those cases, the taxpayer will be assuming the responsibilities of feeding, clothing, educating and providing for health care. I hesitate to mention the cost of criminal activity, victimization, court costs and prisons costs; because we all know that a significant percentage of those will unfortunately go that route.
The system for making children into American citizens is widely known throughout the world. Just get here pregnant, and then have the baby. Voila. They not only do it from Mexico, but all other nations, including from mid-east countries where Islam - peaceful and non-peaceful - is being imported in huge numbers. They are among the millions who are destined to significantly alter the demographic landscape of America in future decades.
Yes. I know all Muslims are not bad people. But, unfortunately, too many are associated with the Jihad movement, which makes this a national security threat to the U.S.
It is so well known and accepted, that one Turkish-owned hotel in New York City, the Marmara Manhattan, has been marketed with "birth tourism packages" to expectant mothers abroad. Talk about brazen. Legal or illegal immigrants are welcomed in order to super-populate this country with outside cultures (and religions) via the 14th amendment loophole which makes children automatic citizens. And in doing so, special immigration status is bestowed upon the parents who would otherwise be illegal because...after all...a baby must be with its mother and/or father.
The nation's school systems alone, which are over burdened and funds poor, face the economic burden of providing education to millions of children born "legally" of "Illegal" parents in America. Those cost burdens, which includes adapting to languages other than English, deplete from quality educational opportunities for the children of legal American families who work here and pay taxes.
In 2004, a study was conducted in three states regarding their annual costs of educating anchor baby children. Estimates ranged $87 million in Pennsylvania, to over one billion dollars in Texas. Then, there's California.
At present, there are approximately 4.7 million children of illegal immigrants in our public schools systems.
It's almost impossible to estimate the health, feeding and housing costs associated with a half million anchor babies born each year, or the future costs of criminal activity which - considering the absence of family stability - a significant percentage of them will engage in.
This is just another facet of the runaway immigration dilemma that is costing the taxpayer billions. Yet, the only answer our politicians can come up with is Comprehensive Immigration Reform, which is nothing more than a euphemism for "Amnesty." Such reform would not save one dime of the cost problems.
What can be done about anchor babies and hotels like the Marmara Manhattan? Rep. Dan Burton of Indiana has proposed HR5002, which is a bill proposed to put the kabash, requiring one parent of a child born here to be an American citizen or legal alien. The bill is still in committee. (Don't hold your breath) Here is a summary:
4/13/2010--Introduced.
No Sanctuary for Illegals Act - Directs the Secretary of Homeland Security (DHS) to: (1) increase border patrol recruitment incentives by offering a ($40,000 maximum) repayment of higher education loans; and (2) develop border patrol retention incentives through the establishment of a retention program. Authorizes the Secretary to deploy newly developed technologies to secure U.S. international land and maritime borders. Directs the Secretary to: (1) prioritize border fence construction; and (2) report to Congress regarding such construction's progress. Requires that if an alien who is unlawfully present in the United States is arrested for any offense by a state or local law enforcement agency the head of such agency shall immediately notify United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) of the arrest and the alien's identity. Requires that such an arrested alien be detained by ICE and presented before an immigration judge for expedited U.S. removal without release from detention and without further hearing or review. Provides for criminal penalties and expedited removal for such a removed alien who subsequently returns unlawfully to the United States. Amends the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) to make inadmissible an alien who has been unlawfully present in the United States for any period of time and who enters or seeks to enter the United States unlawfully. (Current law requires the period of unlawful presence to be more than one year.)
Amends INA to consider a person born in the United States "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States for citizenship at birth purposes if the person is born in the United States of parents, one of whom is: (1) a U.S. citizen or national; (2) a lawful permanent resident alien whose residence is in the United States; or (3) an alien performing active service in the U.S. Armed Forces. Prohibits a federal government officer or employee from providing federal funds to any state or political subdivision that is determined to be interfering with efforts to enforce federal immigration laws. Terminates such prohibition when the state or political subdivision enters into an agreement with the Secretary to cease such interference.
There are two ways to invade a country. From outside and from within. Japan did it from outside. So did Radical Islam...for which we are still at war. The more difficult war, is fighting the invasion from within, because it's subtle and ill-defined, yet just as powerful and effective. The insiders need only to be more patient.
Besides Europe and Canada, I don't see many other countries who are at risk of losing their culture before the end of this century. But we sure are.
We cannot accommodate all the poor and oppressed in the entire world. If we do, there will be no America the Beautiful in future generations. And, the children of our grandkids will never know how great this nation once was.
But...who cares? Right?
For a stark view of the immigration issue by the numbers, check this out:
http://immigrationcounter.com/ This is a real time counter of immigrant activity in the U.S.
More cost factors by the Center for Immigration Studies:
http://cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalexec.html
And More Links:
http://www.fairus.org/site/PageServer?pagename=iic_immigrationissuecenters4608
http://www.voiac.org/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)