Immigration policy – and in particular what to do about the
11 million people in the U.S. illegally – is the new litmus test for the GOP.
The arguments over “amnesty” and border security are stale, but the passions
are not.
Scott Walker is only the latest candidate to stumble over
the immigration tripwire. Though previously supportive of providing a path to
citizenship for undocumented residents, now the Wisconsin governor is talking
up border security. Advice to candidates: maybe it’s time for some new policy
ideas, like demanding an end to our so-called “birthright citizenship.”
Among developed nations, only the U.S. and Canada still
offer automatic citizenship to children born on their soil. Not a single
European country follows the practice. We take this right for granted, but the
evidence is that this entitlement encourages a booming birth tourism business
(which undermines our immigration objectives) and virtually guarantees that the
number of people in the country illegally will continue to grow.
Federal agents recently raided
37 sites in southern California,
which appear to have provided thousands of Chinese women the chance to give
birth to babies on U.S. soil in exchange for fees of up to $60,000. Enticements
included not only the opportunity to acquire automatic citizenship for their
children – a package of free schooling, food, health and retirement benefits
potentially worth millions of dollars – but also more mundane attractions like
nannies, trips to Disneyland and fancy restaurants.
The
New York Times notes
that affidavits filed by law enforcement authorities “quote Chinese government
sources as reporting that Chinese nationals had 10,000 babies in the United
States in 2012, up from 4,200 in 2008.”
For prosperous Chinese or residents of unstable countries
like Russia, an American passport represents an invaluable safety net. Some
estimate that as
many as 40,000 children from all over
the world are born under such circumstances in the U.S. each year. Over time,
with family members climbing aboard, the total allowed into the country
multiples.
Once those babies turn 21,
and if they are in the country, they can sponsor other family members to enter
the U.S. Under our law, which promotes family unification, parents, siblings
and minor children of a U.S. citizen are welcome. According to a report from
John Feere of the Center for Immigration Studies, admitting family members
account for most of the nation’s growth in immigration levels. Of the 1,130,818
immigrants who were granted legal permanent residency in 2009, a total of
747,413 (or, 66 percent) were family-sponsored immigrants.
The commercial exploitation of our laws is repugnant and
should be targeted. But the entire notion that any baby born on U.S. soil
should become a citizen should be challenged as well. The lure of U.S.
citizenship is incalculable, and has long encouraged illegal immigration. In a
phone interview, Feere estimates that some 300,000 to 400,000 babies are born
each year to people living in the country illegally. Pew
puts the figure at 340,000. This
obviously causes substantial growth in the undocumented population, which most
would like to limit.
Critics of the “amnesty” being offered to millions of
undocumented persons by President Obama say that the offer will only encourage
more illegal entrants – and entice even more families to have babies in the
U.S. Obama’s plan provides protection against deportation for three
years, and singles out the undocumented parents of U.S. citizens and legal
permanent residents who have lived in the country for at least five years.
Some 4 to 5 million immigrants fall under that umbrella,
people who had children once inside the country -- children who automatically
became U.S. citizens. Advocates of immigration reform need to convince
opponents that they will reduce the number of undocumented persons entering the
country. While many preach border security, it would be more powerful to make
illegal residency less attractive. Revoking the birthright citizenship would be
a good start.
Immigration advocates argue that automatic citizenship is
protected by the 14th amendment of the Constitution, which states,
“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.” Others say the history of that amendment suggests
otherwise; the debate hasn’t stopped legislators from attempting to limit the
practice.
The first such attempt was in 1993, at the hands of none
other than immigrant advocate Harry Reid, whose bill would have restricted
automatic citizenship to the children of U.S. citizens and legal resident
aliens. Today, Louisiana Senator David Vitter is set to propose an amendment
restricting the automatic citizenship provision to babies born to a U.S.
citizen or a person who is a permanent resident or serving in the military.
This would seem a reasonable change in the current law.
Like so many policy debates, the issue of birthright
citizenship may eventually land in the lap of the Supreme Court. Feere says
that while there have been rulings that grant citizenship to the children of
permanent resident aliens, there has been no decision on the children of
temporary aliens – such as people visiting legally on a student visa – or on
babies born to illegal immigrants.
Astonishingly, the government, which Feere describes as
being on “automatic pilot” on this issue, even gives passports to children born
to foreign diplomats here – clearly people not “subject to the jurisdiction” of
the U.S. When he followed up with the Social Security Administration on this
question, he was told they knew the practice was inappropriate, but were not
sure how to monitor it. Sigh.
Top Reads from The Fiscal Times:
-
http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2015/03/11/Birthright-Citizenship-New-Immigration-Scam?AID=7236
No comments:
Post a Comment