Rethinking Birthright Citizenship
By Justin Gardner | Related entries in ImmigrationThis one hit home because if our immigration problem is so acute, and we have few ways to solve it, these seems like one easy way to start fixing it. After all, why do we have a policy that actually rewards unlawful behavior?
From Congressman Ron Paul:
No other wealthy, western nations grant automatic citizenship to those who simply happen to be born within their borders to non-citizens. These nations recognize that citizenship involves more than the physical location of one’s birth; it also involves some measure of cultural connection and allegiance. In most cases this means the parents must be citizens of a nation in order for their newborn children to receive automatic citizenship.Make no mistake, Americans are happy to welcome immigrants who follow our immigration laws and seek a better life here. America is far more welcoming and tolerant of newcomers than virtually any nation on earth. But our modern welfare state creates perverse incentives for immigrants, incentives that cloud the issue of why people choose to come here. The real problem is not immigration, but rather the welfare state magnet.
Hospitals bear the costs when illegal immigrants enter the country for the express purpose of giving birth. But illegal immigrants also use emergency rooms, public roads, and public schools. In many cases they are able to obtain Medicaid, food stamps, public housing, and even unemployment benefits. Some have fraudulently collected Social Security benefits.
Of course many American citizens also use or abuse the welfare system. But we cannot afford to open our pocketbooks to the rest of the world. We must end the perverse incentives that encourage immigrants to come here illegally, including the anchor baby incentive.
It is odd that we still keep this law alive when we all realize it’s unpractical and actually encourages people to break the law. Not to mention the cost.
What do you think? Is it time to stop automatic birthright citizenship? And if so, what programs should we put in place to make sure that the health of the child is taken care of before the family is deported?
This entry was posted on Saturday, October 7th, 2006 and is filed under Immigration. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
October 7th, 2006 at 12:55 pm
Congressman Ron Paul is incorrect on at least one point. Canada also grants automatic citizenship to anyone born on Canadian territory. And I’m willing to bet there are others.
Not that the issue isn’t worth debating, but you’d probably want to double-check his facts, but it doesn’t look like he has.
October 7th, 2006 at 1:10 pm
I so wish that our representatives would get the facts straight before the shoot off about the “welfare state.” Where are the data that support Ron Paul’s statements? The fact is, immigrants come here to work, and they use little else but use the public school system to educate their children. That is a small price to pay for the overall benefit that the American citizen population receives in cheap labor and low service costs, cheap produce and millions in social security that undocumented immigrants pay into the system, but will most likely never receive.
The United States is a sovereign nation, and as such we have the right to openly debate and then change our citizenship requirements if we believe it is in our best interest to do so. If we are going to do this, however, we need to look at the real issues surrounding immigration, particularly that these people come here to work and they work because they are hired by American citizens who knowingly break the law. Instead of changing a law that is unlikely to be contributing to the immigration problem, why not look at other developed nations to see how they handle immigration? Why is it that France and Germany, with robust economies and substantial immigrant populations, do not share our plight? The answer here is not whether or not one can produce offspring that will become citizens, but a serious immigration overhaul that includes a national identity card and serious consequences for employers who hire undocumented workers.
It is so simple (and simpleminded) to scapegoat immigrants when we are to blame for the situation we find ourselves in with undocumented immigration. We can stop this any time we want to, but our leadership will to be more concerned with the future of the nation than the next election cycle or raising campaign contributions based on sound bites.
October 7th, 2006 at 2:47 pm
And here I am leaning on a politician to have researched this.
Heh…
October 7th, 2006 at 3:29 pm
As far as I know, birthright citizenship occurs in the US, Canada, UK, Brazil, Ireland, Netherlands, Sweden and probably quite a few other countries as well.
October 7th, 2006 at 3:44 pm
Alright, let’s take away the accuracy component of the start of his argument for a second and tackle the core question: what to do about immigration?
Should we rewarding illegals by giving their newborn children citizenship just because they were able to get across our borders? Does that make any amount of sense whatsoever in this day and age?
October 7th, 2006 at 4:57 pm
It makes no sense to give citizenship to children whose parents are here illegally. Just silly! Illegal immigrants are causing expensive problems in our schools, hospitals and jails, to name just a few problems. But, obviously some industries DO need them for workers. What is wrong with our government that they cannot regulate this properly??
No one should come here who is not legal, but needed workers should get permits.
Cut out the drug dealers, gang & criminals, of which right now there are MANY on the loose, in jails and in federal prisons & working on our docks. Crazy! Look closely at the crime problems in Mexico & wake up to what a serious threat this is.. Integration & learning English should be mandatory for citizenship.. Rich Mexicans should be pressured to educate their own people & clean up their own mess. Push for THAT.
October 7th, 2006 at 5:35 pm
By the way.. I was told that in Wisconsin prisons, we have teachers for the HIspanic illegal inmates, to teach them to read and write in SPANISH. I am not kidding. Mexico has natural resources, beautiful country, great climate. They have poverty of 40% due to corruption and exploitation, pure and simple. Why do we not hear our government raising hell with them to change THEIR system? Why are we not charging them for what they cost us in taxpayer expenses? The billions that Mexican workers send home is a form of “foreign aid” and money removed from our economy. The Mexican Army and police forces are corrupt and dangerous. Clean up Mexico and our Boomers can retire their at low cost and in a sunny climate: a win-win. In sections of New York, illegal Hispanics demand that the schools teach their kids ONLY in Spanish. Check it out… I am not making this up. We need a realistic approach to this incredible MESS not politically correct assumptions from the Far Right or Far Left. Get Practical about it!
October 7th, 2006 at 6:21 pm
Ron Paul’s everybody-else-is-doing-it part of the argument was pretty weak and should be disregarded anyhow. The idea should stand on its own merit. That said, I think it does. In many countries, you have to have been a legal resident for somewhere around 10 years before you can get citizenship, and in most cases, it involves giving up your citizenship in all other countries. There’s very few places that allow you to gain dual citizenship, because it’s recognized that it’s no simple matter to serve two masters. Ideally, citizenship should have loyalty to the country (not necessarily the government) as a prerequisite. Of course, that’s a practice that is more or less relegated to Heinlein’s science fiction, and ultimately would be difficult to bring into the real world for the simple reason that loyalty is a difficult thing to demonstrate or identify, especially without creating a heavy political bias in the process. But sufficient time spent residing in-country, legally, usually makes for a practical facsimile of loyalty.
October 8th, 2006 at 7:32 am
This is a classic case of our emotions getting ahead of our best interests.
Why would we want a permanent, hereditary class of non-citizens? As with all others who came to this country legally and illegally, we should want speedy assimilation. Irish, Italian, Slavic, Asian and other peoples came here for work. They were typically undereducated, poor and gutsy enough to seek out a new life.
Until 1924, nobody was illegal, because immigration did not require quotas or passports. This period included the first big wave of Mexican immigrants, fleeing the 1910-1924 Revolution. Their families are now the super-patriotic Hispanic Americans, who trace their American roots for generations. These are the families with the highest rate of volunteerism for U.S. military service.
One of the dumbest things the European countries have done is discourage assimilation. That’s why there are still huge unassimilated Islamic communities in England, while immigrants to the U.S. are often patriotic entreprenuers.
It really makes no sense to punish children for the sins (or risk taking) or their parents. And, in the long run, we only penalize ourselves with unassimilated, balkanized communities.
For my own part, I have learned that when my ancestors came to the U.S. in the 18th and 19th centuries, the first thing they asked when they got off the boat was “where can I get free medical care?” Apparently freedom and the American dream had little to do with their decision to immigrate.
In short, we should do what is necessary to strengthen our borders and simultaneously do what is smart to promote assimilation.
October 8th, 2006 at 1:30 pm
Deb -
Where to begin? You are not putting forth credible or even reality-based arguments.
>The fact is, immigrants come here to work, and they use little else but use the public school system to educate their children.
How could this possible be true? 100% are arriving without health care insurance. 100% are arriving unemployed. Nearly 100% are arriving with very little education. And you think they are using minimal public services? These workers are competing for work along with the most vulnerable US workers. How can this help the US working poor? Do you really need statistics to back up these common sense realities?
Yes, these illegal immigrants are not bad people. They are no different that the 1 billion plus who are faced with economic and social hardship. This reality is no reason to get control of whom we let in to this country. And the fact that there are greedy employers willing to hire them than less the going rate for US workers is not an excuse for inaction. Both the demand and supply side of this problem needs to be addressed. And please do not bring in the argument that the illegal immigrants are doing the work that Americans will not do. The Americans will not do it for the going rate. Period. If wages increase, I am sure that the job vacancies will be filled. And yes, this will mean that consumers will pay higher prices. Isn’t the same scenario that some hope for regarding Wal-Mart? They chide Wal-Mart for squeezing suppliers and labor to lower costs so they can charge lower prices. People criticize Wal-Mart shoppers for selling out there fellow man (in terms of lower wages) for $0.99 shampoo. “Why can’t they pay a few more cents so each worker can get a slightly higher wage and/or benefits,” they say. In other words, higher prices can pay for higher wages. But this cannot happen if people sneak into this country and undercut the equilibrium wage.
>Why is it that France and Germany, with robust economies and substantial immigrant populations, do not share our plight?
Are you serious? Robust economies? Both countries have u-rates over 10%. And this has been the case for over 10 years (France’s u-rate has fallen below the 10% mark for a brief time during this time period). And it is generally accepted that these rates understate the true u-rate. Both economies (especially Germany’s) have been growing well below their potential (0%-2% per year). France is still reeling from a wave of riots by unhappy immigrants and 1st generation French. Western Europe, especially France, saw over 15,000 people perish in the ‘03 heat wave. This dwarfs the much sited Katrina disaster where about 1,000 people died. And who where the vast majority of the 15,000 people who died in that heat wave? They were the elderly and poor.
>It is so simple (and simpleminded) to scapegoat immigrants when we are to blame for the situation we find ourselves in with undocumented immigration.
I submit that it is simpleminded to call someone racist or callous if they simply want to stop the illegal part of the immigration story. I am for legal immigration. My sister-in-law had to leave this country because her work visa expired. I guarantee that she could have found an employer to pay her under the table. And I guess that any job she found would be by definition, a job that an American is not willing to do. But she did not. She reluctantly left and is trying her best to get back in. Having her hop on a plane to Tijuana and cross the boarder illegally is not in our best interests. Reforming our broken system is. And any reform will have to include getting control over the boarders and penalizing employers who employ illegal immigrants.
October 8th, 2006 at 8:16 pm
Amen to Marteen! France is in one huge mess for their patience and kindness towards anybody who cared to drop in…including one African village that is demanding housing for families of 10 & all in CLOSE proximity to each other, or ELSE. Talk about a sense of entitlement, but the French created it with their too-high tolerance. We are doing the same thing with illegal Hispanics… worrying too much about being fair to them, while not taking care of our own country. Control the borders, create a reliable sysytem for foreign workers based on employer applications, NOT on under the table employment! Children born here to non-citizens keep their parents’ citizenship and go back to their own country when the job is over… or, apply for citizenship when their parents do & earn the right to have it. What is so tough about that??? Be PRACTICAL.
October 8th, 2006 at 8:16 pm
Amen to Marteen! France is in one huge mess for their patience and kindness towards anybody who cared to drop in…including one African village that is demanding housing for families of 10 & all in CLOSE proximity to each other, or ELSE. Talk about a sense of entitlement, but the French created it with their too-high tolerance. We are doing the same thing with illegal Hispanics… worrying too much about being fair to them, while not taking care of our own country. Control the borders, create a reliable sysytem for foreign workers based on employer applications, NOT on under the table employment! Children born here to non-citizens keep their parents’ citizenship and go back to their own country when the job is over… or, apply for citizenship when their parents do & earn the right to have it. What is so tough about that??? Be PRACTICAL.
October 8th, 2006 at 9:10 pm
I have absolutely no problem with awarding citizenship to anyone born in our nation. What point is there in punishing children who happen to have parents who came her illegally? After all, I have yet to meet any child of imigrants (illegal or otherwise) who doesn’t speak fluent English, dress in American styles and consider themselves an American. Despite what many claim, most imigrants never really assimilate. It’s the CHILDREN who assimilate.
Our problem is with the illegals themselves. Not with their children. Let’s keep our eye on the ball here.
October 8th, 2006 at 11:37 pm
Too right, Alan!
No question but that our immigration policy is a mess. And eventually we need to create something based on the needs of the country, rather than the paranoia of the xenophobes. But punishing people who are born here, and know no other nation but this one, is both stupid and immoral.
October 9th, 2006 at 10:31 am
Our problem isn’t with illegal immigrants — it is with the nanny-state and protectionism.
October 9th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Justin’ one more point to mention is that it is argued by constitutional experts that Article 14 may not actually gaurantee automatic citizenship. It gaurantees unalienable rights, so they can’t be thrown in jail, persecuted, etc. Are they legally entitled to our Health, Education, Welfare Systems ? Some experts don’t believe so. But does this mean these social institutions are the problems? Why do some think they will make their agenda all of ours, or, parden the pun, throw out the baby with the bathwater
October 9th, 2006 at 9:19 pm
To answer the initial question, yes, reviewing the concept of birthright citizenship is very reasonable. It’s one of those things that are very different now than they were when the Constitution was written. It took a lot more effort to come here back then and even more to go back home.
October 19th, 2006 at 11:53 am
Immigration is a horrible problem in the US and Europe (Including Russia) and Australia. Some people benefit like gangbusters from the immigrants, but most of us are hurt, and they’re a net negative to anybody’s economy. All kinds of statistics and other information supporting this conclusion can be found at:
http://www.vdare.com/
And the 14th Amendment’s purpose was to insure that ex-slaves wouldn’t be denied citizenship. That’s all.