Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15

Thread: Pew Immigration Study Undermines 'Anchor Baby' Argument

  1. #1
    Slayer of the DP Newsbot
    danarhea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:54 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    39,756

    Pew Immigration Study Undermines 'Anchor Baby' Argument

    New Estimates from the Pew Hispanic Center find that the "number of children born to at least one unauthorized-immigrant parent in 2009 was 350,000, essentially the same as it was a year earlier." These children accounted for 8% of newborns in the U.S. from March 2009 to March 2010. But interestingly, only a fraction of the babies were born to parents who have recently arrived in the country -- running counter to an argument made by conservatives who want to do away with birthright citizenship.
    OK, so the anchor baby argument is somewhat invalid. However, that does not mitigate the fact that illegal aliens are coming to the country, and having babies, sometimes many years after arriving. Logic dictates that the babies are STILL anchor babies. Whether intended or not, the result is the same.

    Ending this problem, however, is going to be tough. You can't just pass legislation disallowing anchor babies, because that runs counter to the Constitution, which defines "natural born citizen"..... Or can we? Legally, the only way to end the problem of anchor babies is going to be through a Constitutional amendment, and considering what has to happen before an amendment is passed, this problem is going to be a very tough one to crack... Or are there other solutions?

    So, I would like to hear some ideas, which we at DP can then examine for Constitutionality. Let's not get emotional about this. Let's examine the law, and see what remedies are actually available.

    We will begin by making an assumption that EVERYBODY at DP wants to end "anchor babies". Everybody try to come up with some ideas. We will then look at the law, as it exists at the present time, to see if any solution offered can pass Constitutional muster.

    I think this will be both fun and educational for all of us. So here is where we stand - The only option on the board at this time is a Constitutional amendment. What are the other options, if any? Are any of those other options Constitutional?

    Have at it, folks.

    Article is here.
    Last edited by danarhea; 02-03-11 at 04:23 PM.
    The ghost of Jack Kevorkian for President's Physician: 2016

  2. #2
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: Pew Immigration Study Undermines 'Anchor Baby' Argument

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea View Post
    We will begin by making an assumption that EVERYBODY at DP wants to end "anchor babies".
    Why? What exactly is the problem?

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea
    Everybody try to come up with some ideas. We will then look at the law, as it exists at the present time, to see if any solution offered can pass Constitutional muster.
    I have a solution that is simple, constitutional, and plausible: Do nothing.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  3. #3
    User
    Chappy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    San Francisco
    Last Seen
    04-07-15 @ 01:50 AM
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    2,443
    Blog Entries
    26

    Re: Pew Immigration Study Undermines 'Anchor Baby' Argument

    I like the linkage.

    In my view there is no such thing as anchor babies; hence, no problem to solve. Children who want to sponsor their parents' immigration must already wait until they are 21-years-old. This idea that having a baby in this country provides an immediate solution to one's immigration status is wrong.

    With regard to undocumented workers, my solution is to document them! Expand existing guest workers programs and provide a means should they choose to, to become citizens.
    Last edited by Chappy; 02-03-11 at 04:33 PM.
    “Real environmentalists live in cities, and they visit what's left of the wilderness as gently and respectfully as possible.” — Donna Moulton, letter to the editor, Tucson Weekly, published on August 23, 2001

  4. #4
    White trash on dope.
    d0gbreath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Denton, TX
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    8,876

    Re: Pew Immigration Study Undermines 'Anchor Baby' Argument

    I'm surprised at the 350k/yr. number. I assumed that most of the illegals were young men working out of town with plans to head back home after a few years. I didn't see many that brought their wives and kids when I was in construction.

    They all complained about the corruption in the Mexican government. Yet, they didn't want to move to the US and be away from their families.

    So, ban the anchor baby. Those guys could care less.
    Quote Originally Posted by Northern Light View Post
    The systems that ensure freedom and liberty are breaking down and fundamentalism is growing. Nobody is righteous anymore.


  5. #5
    Sage


    MaggieD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Chicago Area
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    43,243
    Blog Entries
    43

    Re: Pew Immigration Study Undermines 'Anchor Baby' Argument

    Quote Originally Posted by Chappy View Post
    I like the linkage.

    In my view there is no such thing as anchor babies; hence, no problem to solve. Children who want to sponsor their parents' immigration must already wait until they are 21-years-old. This idea that having a baby in this country provides an immediate solution to one's immigration status is wrong.

    With regard to undocumented workers, my solution is to document them! Expand existing guest workers programs and provide a means should they choose to, to become citizens.
    No, anchor babies don't influence their parents' immigration standing; it simply means that taxpayers are supporting them...and their parent/s. Make the children ineligible to receive taxpayer assistance, and you'd get no argument from me about changing the law. I'd say, "Leave it alone," as well.

    In the meantime, anchor babies immediately come into an 18-year annuity that supports their parent/s -- at taxpayer expense.
    The devil whispered in my ear, "You cannot withstand the storm." I whispered back, "I am ​the storm."

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    My own world
    Last Seen
    04-05-11 @ 10:39 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    407

    Re: Pew Immigration Study Undermines 'Anchor Baby' Argument

    only 350,000? Oh, a pittance, of course.

    Aside from the paltry number of stinking infants, screaming for USA brand formula, let us not forget, kiddies, their errant illegal thieving families now are able to enjoy the land of milk and honey under the umbrella of family.

    If liberals were any more stupid, I imagine Depends Adult Undergarments would be a stock in which to invest my pennies.

  7. #7
    User
    Chappy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    San Francisco
    Last Seen
    04-07-15 @ 01:50 AM
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    2,443
    Blog Entries
    26

    Re: Pew Immigration Study Undermines 'Anchor Baby' Argument

    Quote Originally Posted by MaggieD View Post
    No, anchor babies don't influence their parents' immigration standing; it simply means that taxpayers are supporting them...and their parent/s. Make the children ineligible to receive taxpayer assistance, and you'd get no argument from me about changing the law. I'd say, "Leave it alone," as well.

    In the meantime, anchor babies immediately come into an 18-year annuity that supports their parent/s -- at taxpayer expense.
    Undocumented workers pay payroll taxes but never collect social security or unemployment compensation. They pay sales taxes.

    All these claims of them depending on assistance programs, mostly related to health care, is precisely the reason they should be documented and made eligible for employer-provided health insurance.
    “Real environmentalists live in cities, and they visit what's left of the wilderness as gently and respectfully as possible.” — Donna Moulton, letter to the editor, Tucson Weekly, published on August 23, 2001

  8. #8
    Dungeon Master
    Veni, vidi, dormivi!

    spud_meister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Didjabringabeeralong
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    33,874
    Blog Entries
    8

    Re: Pew Immigration Study Undermines 'Anchor Baby' Argument

    Simple, just amend it to say that a child born in the US must have both parents there legally to be a citizen.
    So follow me into the desert
    As desperate as you are
    Where the moon is glued to a picture of heaven
    And all the little pigs have God

  9. #9
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Undisclosed
    Last Seen
    03-18-13 @ 02:59 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    5,544

    Re: Pew Immigration Study Undermines 'Anchor Baby' Argument

    Quote Originally Posted by Chappy View Post
    Undocumented workers pay payroll taxes but never collect social security or unemployment compensation. They pay sales taxes.

    All these claims of them depending on assistance programs, mostly related to health care, is precisely the reason they should be documented and made eligible for employer-provided health insurance.
    One size doesn't fit all. Some pay payroll taxes, and probably as many get paid in cash under the table. There's not any way of knowing to the best of my knowledge.

    It's possible to legalize all illegal immigrants, but first you have to fight and win a civil war.

  10. #10
    Slayer of the DP Newsbot
    danarhea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:54 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    39,756

    Re: Pew Immigration Study Undermines 'Anchor Baby' Argument

    Quote Originally Posted by Ed Gein View Post
    only 350,000? Oh, a pittance, of course.

    Aside from the paltry number of stinking infants, screaming for USA brand formula, let us not forget, kiddies, their errant illegal thieving families now are able to enjoy the land of milk and honey under the umbrella of family.

    If liberals were any more stupid, I imagine Depends Adult Undergarments would be a stock in which to invest my pennies.
    Hey, my thread, my rules. Read my first post again. Expecially read this part again:

    Let's not get emotional about this. Let's examine the law, and see what remedies are actually available.
    In English, that means no baiting and no trolling. Please observe, or don't post in this thread. Besides, what you posted made no sense at all.
    The ghost of Jack Kevorkian for President's Physician: 2016

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •