Hernando Today
A Publication of the Tampa Tribune

Anchor Babies Weigh Down Economy

JOHN REINIERS, Special to Hernando Today

Published: January 26, 2008

About every six months the population of the U.S. increases about as much as the population of Tallahassee. Who are these hundreds of thousands of new citizens? They are newborns, children of illegal aliens born in the United States - birthright citizens, "anchor babies" - not illegal aliens. This quirky legal right then allows the mother's parents and siblings to remain, and later a whole bunch of their relatives to immigrate legally. This why they are also known as "Jackpot babies."

Just consider Parkland Memorial Hospital in Dallas, the second busiest maternity ward in the U.S. In 2006, 70 percent of the women giving birth in Parkland were illegal immigrants. That added up to 11,200 babies for which Medicaid kicked in $34.5 million to deliver these babies, the feds another $9.5 million and Dallas taxpayers tossed in $31.3 million. The average illegal patient is 25 years old and giving birth to her second anchor baby. We could also talk about California, but you get the point.

By law, illegal immigrants cannot be denied medical care based on their inability to pay or their immigration status. These women also receive free prenatal care, medication, car seats, bottles, diapers and formula.

The U.S. and a few other countries offer citizenship to anyone born on their soil. The United Kingdom and Australia abandoned this practice in the 1980s after being abused by immigrants for many years.

Why do we allow this to continue? The 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the states wherein they reside...

It was added to our Constitution right after the Civil War as part of a package of reforms to prevent any more injustices to African Americans, such as states denying citizenship to native born blacks. The drafters of the "Citizenship clause" made it clear from their debate, that the clause "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" meant that the status of the parents of a child born within the territory of the U.S. determines whether of not that child is eligible for U.S. citizenship.

There have been surprisingly few Supreme Court opinions construing this clause - the results being a mixed bag of decisions. The lawyer in me wants to go into detail, but let me be mercifully brief: The latest case involved a terrorist who happened to be born in Louisiana, when his father, a native of Mecca, Saudi Arabia, was working as an engineer for Exxon. He returned to Saudi Arabia as an infant, took up with al Qaeda as an adult, was captured during a battle in Afghanistan and wound up imprisoned in Guantanamo Bay.

The Supreme Court held that this Saudi, being Louisiana born, had a due process right as a citizen to challenge his detention as an enemy combatant. This ruling simply does not comform with any of the text or history surrounding the adoption of the Citizenship Clause. Just being born in the U.S. doesn't cut it, because such an interpretation renders the "subject to the jurisdiction" clause entirely redundant. It is a well settled doctrine of legal interpretation that legal texts - most certainly the Constitution - are not to be interpreted to make some words altogether redundant. In other words why didn't the drafters just say, "All persons born or naturalized in the United States ... are citizens of the United States?" (Imagine two terrorists - man and wife jihadis - slipping past border guards into a U.S. city to set up a terrorist cell. The wife then gives birth to a child. Should this budding young terrorist be an instant American citizen?)

Help could be on the way, but don't hold your breath. In 2007, U.S. Rep. Nathan Deal, R-Ga., introduced H.R. 1940, The Birthright Citizenship Act of 2007, which would end automatic citizenship to babies born in the U.S. to illegal aliens. For those Americans who look to Europe - the cradle of our American civilization - for guidance, Ireland, in 2004 voted to end automatic citizenship. That was the last member of the European Union to allow pregnant foreigners to gain residence and welfare benefits as a result of just being born there.

The political fallout of this bill could be enormous.

Patriotism is when the love of your own people comes first. Politics, for Democrats, is thinking of the next election, and not what is best for the next generation of Americans. With that in mind, illegal aliens and their progeny will continue to be one more group on the list of Democrat constituencies.

John Reiniers, a regular columnist for Hernando Today, lives in Spring Hill.

Anchor Babies Weigh Down Economy

The first anchor baby we ought to cut free is Michelle Malkin. =D

__________________

This is bull as well, some do with stolen ID, and they send most of their pay back home, to mexico, to support that country,so they are paiding into the mexican system..

__________________
GOD BLESS AMERICA AND ALL THAT DEFEND HER!!!!

I have no issue with greater access to legal immigration or a guest worker program that allows earning citizenship or the people that are here on green cards and paying taxes.

However, this is a human tsunami. American taxpayers cannot afford to keep paying for medical, educational, social and other services. This is a big (non racist) issue that needs to be addressed.

Then there are aspects of the illegal immigration I do not support. Unfortunately, people come across with criminal records, some are drug traffickers, some end up going to the blackmarket on stolen identities, some end up increasing our gang problems in large cities. I do not support this aspect of illegal immigration.

__________________
National Debt =