Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
We have to address this issue, "ANCHOR BABIES." The birth of an "anchor baby" immediately attaches the family unit to the United States. Though the child is being declared a citizen without either parent being legal, the cries from illegal aliens to not seperate families, don't seperate me from my US born child/children is playing to sympathy for illegal aliens, their supporters and given publicity by the media.
Here is the bill as brought up by Representative Nathan Deal of Georgia:
Legislation > H.R. 1940 (110th U.S. Congress: 2007-2008)
H.R. 1940: To amend section 301 of the Immigration and Nationality Act to clarify those classes of...
HR 1940 IH
110th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. R. 1940
To amend section 301 of the Immigration and Nationality Act to clarify those classes of individuals born in the United States who are nationals and citizens of the United States at birth.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
April 19, 2007
Mr. DEAL of Georgia (for himself, Mr. BILBRAY, and Mr. DANIEL E. LUNGREN of California) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary
A BILL
To amend section 301 of the Immigration and Nationality Act to clarify those classes of individuals born in the United States who are nationals and citizens of the United States at birth.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `Birthright Citizenship Act of 2007'.
SEC. 2. CITIZENSHIP AT BIRTH FOR CERTAIN PERSONS BORN IN THE UNITED STATES.
(a) In General- Section 301 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1401) is amended--
(1) by inserting `(a) IN GENERAL- ' before `The following';
(2) by redesignating paragraphs (a) through (h) as paragraphs (1) through (; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
`(b) Definition- Acknowledging the right of birthright citizenship established by section 1 of the 14th amendment to the Constitution, a person born in the United States shall be considered `subject to the jurisdiction' of the United States for purposes of subsection (a)(1) if the person is born in the United States of parents, one of whom is--
`(1) a citizen or national of the United States;
`(2) an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the United States whose residence is in the United States; or
`(3) an alien performing active service in the armed forces (as defined in section 101 of title 10, United States Code).'.
(b) Applicability- The amendment made by subsection (a)(3) shall not be construed to affect the citizenship or nationality status of any person born before the date of the enactment of this Act.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FAXES should go out to end the birthright citizenship practice for illegal aliens who have children on American soil. They are citizens of another country, they are not of our jurisdiction and we should demand this misinterpretation of the 14th amendment ends. The billions in dollars that are being paid for by American taxpayers to keep the anchor baby fraud going is going to have to end or cripple us completely. These illegal aliens are often young, child bearing in age and they are totally aware of the benefits of having a child on US soil.
We pay health insurance that generally covers childbirth, these illegal aliens pay NOTHING and yet receive the very same care. Ending this very act is vital to ending a big, fat magnet to illegal aliens.
Let's get the message out, STOP THE ANCHOR BABIES (Birthright Citizenship), Americans cannot afford this insanity
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ ___
READ THE BOTTOM FEW PARAGRAPHS - IT HAS BEEN BROUGHT UP AGAIN BY REP. NATHAN DEAL OF GEORGIA WITH SEVERAL CO-SPONSORS
WE SHOULD CONTACT HIM AND VOICE SUPPORT AND ENCOURAGE OUR REPRESENTATIVES AND SENATORS TO SUPPORT AS WELL, IF NOT ALREADY CO- SPONSORS
Quote:
$6 Billion a Year for Mexican “Anchor Babies?”
Source: The Family Security Foundation, Inc.
Date: June 6, 2007
Are you aware of a well funded illegal immigrant support group which funnels tear jerking propaganda through liberal media outlets about the plight of babies born in the USA of illegal parents? FSM Contributing Editor exposes this “shamnesty” and the price tag for American taxpayers.
$6 Billion a Year for Mexican “Anchor Babies?”
Another major flaw in the Senate immigration bill is the failure to repeal the provision that babies born to illegal aliens in the U.S. get automatic U.S. citizenship. This is known as birthright citizenship.
Birthright citizenship is one of the media’s powerful tools to advance the Senate immigration bill. The media use young children, even babies, as showpieces, arguing that if the government does not legalize, or grant amnesty to their parents, then these children will be left without mothers and fathers if their parents are deported. It’s one sob story after another.
An example was a May 20, 2007, article in the Washington Post Style section using a color half-page photo that covered the entire upper fold of the front page with the picture of a young girl crying while being held in her mother’s arms. The photo ran with the headline “Poster Child.” It showed a March 7 photo of 2-year-old Tomasa Mendez, “crying in her mother’s arms because her father was suspected of being in the U.S. illegally…” Mendez was born here; her parents were not. Her father was taken into custody by immigration authorities for doing illegal work at a Massachusetts clothing factory that makes backpacks for U.S. military personnel. The implication however was clear¯that her father, and perhaps her mother, might be deported, and the poor child would be left behind.
The Post and Illegals
Notice that the Post says her father was “suspected” of being in the U.S. illegally when there is absolutely no doubt he and his wife entered the country illegally and had this child. We can’t even expect the basic facts of the story from the Post because they tend to make the parents look bad. And sympathy for illegals is a given at this paper. The Post, of course, is the paper associated with the Philip L. Graham Fund, which provided funds to Casa de Maryland, an illegal alien support group.
The Post exploits the little girl, Tomasa, and calls her photo “iconic” of the immigration debate, rather than use photos of illegal aliens climbing over border fences, or of illegal alien terrorists that were responsible for planning terrorist attacks here on U.S. soil, or of illegal alien sex predators, or of the illegal aliens that commit crimes here in the U.S.
This is the face¯a crying girl¯that pro-illegal alien supporters and illegal aliens themselves are using to support their cause. The Post even claims that Tomasa has come to “symbolize” the national debate on immigration. According to the Post, “thousands of posters and fliers featuring Tomasa’s tearful visage” have been made to influence the public and Congress and that the same photo was used on “placards carried by marchers at immigrant-rights rallies from Denver to New York to Washington.”
I respect your opinion, however one point to keep in mind about the use of health insurance costs as an argument:
"Children, parents and pregnant women make up the largest MA group (70 percent), but they account for only 25 percent of expenditures. The remaining 75 percent of expenditures is for people who are elderly or have a disability." Dept of Human Services, MA page.
Of course, there are other reasons to want to change the policy - but a huge health care cost just isn't one of them.
READ THE BOTTOM FEW PARAGRAPHS - IT HAS BEEN BROUGHT UP AGAIN BY REP. NATHAN DEAL OF GEORGIA WITH SEVERAL CO-SPONSORS
WE SHOULD CONTACT HIM AND VOICE SUPPORT AND ENCOURAGE OUR REPRESENTATIVES AND SENATORS TO SUPPORT AS WELL, IF NOT ALREADY CO- SPONSORS
Quote:
$6 Billion a Year for Mexican “Anchor Babies?”
Source: The Family Security Foundation, Inc.
Date: June 6, 2007
Are you aware of a well funded illegal immigrant support group which funnels tear jerking propaganda through liberal media outlets about the plight of babies born in the USA of illegal parents? FSM Contributing Editor exposes this “shamnesty” and the price tag for American taxpayers.
$6 Billion a Year for Mexican “Anchor Babies?”
Another major flaw in the Senate immigration bill is the failure to repeal the provision that babies born to illegal aliens in the U.S. get automatic U.S. citizenship. This is known as birthright citizenship.
Birthright citizenship is one of the media’s powerful tools to advance the Senate immigration bill. The media use young children, even babies, as showpieces, arguing that if the government does not legalize, or grant amnesty to their parents, then these children will be left without mothers and fathers if their parents are deported. It’s one sob story after another.
An example was a May 20, 2007, article in the Washington Post Style section using a color half-page photo that covered the entire upper fold of the front page with the picture of a young girl crying while being held in her mother’s arms. The photo ran with the headline “Poster Child.” It showed a March 7 photo of 2-year-old Tomasa Mendez, “crying in her mother’s arms because her father was suspected of being in the U.S. illegally…” Mendez was born here; her parents were not. Her father was taken into custody by immigration authorities for doing illegal work at a Massachusetts clothing factory that makes backpacks for U.S. military personnel. The implication however was clear¯that her father, and perhaps her mother, might be deported, and the poor child would be left behind.
The Post and Illegals
Notice that the Post says her father was “suspected” of being in the U.S. illegally when there is absolutely no doubt he and his wife entered the country illegally and had this child. We can’t even expect the basic facts of the story from the Post because they tend to make the parents look bad. And sympathy for illegals is a given at this paper. The Post, of course, is the paper associated with the Philip L. Graham Fund, which provided funds to Casa de Maryland, an illegal alien support group.
The Post exploits the little girl, Tomasa, and calls her photo “iconic” of the immigration debate, rather than use photos of illegal aliens climbing over border fences, or of illegal alien terrorists that were responsible for planning terrorist attacks here on U.S. soil, or of illegal alien sex predators, or of the illegal aliens that commit crimes here in the U.S.
This is the face¯a crying girl¯that pro-illegal alien supporters and illegal aliens themselves are using to support their cause. The Post even claims that Tomasa has come to “symbolize” the national debate on immigration. According to the Post, “thousands of posters and fliers featuring Tomasa’s tearful visage” have been made to influence the public and Congress and that the same photo was used on “placards carried by marchers at immigrant-rights rallies from Denver to New York to Washington.”
So, only Mexican anchor babies? I fail to see this correlation. In the keywords: congress, security, Mexican? Why is Mexican apart of the keywords? Have we forgotten that not just Mexicans are illegal aliens?
Illegial immigrants that are hurting me are Brazilians, columbians, El Salvadors, basically South Americans!!!!! They are killing me finacially and eventually they will be the cause of lowered wages and standards
Illegial immigrants that are hurting me are Brazilians, columbians, El Salvadors, basically South Americans!!!!! They are killing me finacially and eventually they will be the cause of lowered wages and standards
Look, basic economics. I don't think it will have any significant impact on wages. If there are two contractors, one can do the job for $5000. The other illegal immigrant contractor can do the job for $2500. Who is the average American going to go with? He's middle class, and doesn't have a lot of money to kick around so obviously he's going to pick the illegal immigrant.
Look, basic economics. I don't think it will have any significant impact on wages. If there are two contractors, one can do the job for $5000. The other illegal immigrant contractor can do the job for $2500. Who is the average American going to go with? He's middle class, and doesn't have a lot of money to kick around so obviously he's going to pick the illegal immigrant.
And when the working American can't get a job because he's being undercut by the illegal, are you going to pay higher taxes to feed his family? Because if he has sense he will file for some kind of public assistance. If the answer is yes then by all means get a second job, you'll need one to offset the money you'll be missing from your primary paycheck. This day is coming faster than you know.
They will most certainly drive down the wages in this country. Unions are becoming more and more obsolite you know the people who gave you weekends off and coffee breaks, lunch breaks and vacations. When they go who will regulate the pay standard and cost of living increases? The government? HA HA
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Not just Mexicans
