Babies Everywhere
One of about every 12 babies born in the United States in 2008 was the offspring of unauthorized immigrants, a Pew Hispanic Center study released Wednesday concluded.
According to the study, an estimated 340,000 of the 4.3 million babies born in this country that year had parents who were in the United States without legal documentation.
The 14th Amendment to the Constitution stipulates that those children automatically become U.S. citizens, but some members of Congress are pushing to change that provision. That effort—rooted in the debate over illegal immigration, particularly of people from Mexico—has created some controversy.
“This has got a lot of attention in the past weeks,” said Jeffrey S. Passel, the study’s author. “The idea was just to put a number on it.”
According to the study, 79 percent of the 5.1 million children of unauthorized immigrants in the United States were born in this country, making them U.S. citizens.
Nearly one of four children born in the United States in 2008 had parents who were immigrants, the Pew study found. Of those, 16 percent of the parents were legal immigrants and 8 percent were in the United States without proper documentation.
So of the children born in the U.S. in 2008, 25% were born to immigrant parents and 8% of those parents were here illegally?
That means….
0.25 * 0.08 = 0.02
So 2% of the babies born here in 2008 were born to parents of illegal immigrants. Boy, that sure is an epidemic worthy of AMENDING OUR F-ING CONSTITUION!
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 11, 2010 at 2342 hrs
Edit: Immediately after posting, I reread the last paragraph and now I’m all kinds of confused. It says “of those, 16 percent of the parents were legal immigrants and 8 percent were in the United States without proper documentation.”
Obviously that adds up to “nearly one in four”. But the way the sentence is written, it implies that 8% of the parents of the 1 in 4 are here illegally. What they actually mean is 8% of the children born in the U.S. in 2008 had illegal immigrants for parents.
Then again, it is a cnn.com story, so the poor quality of the article is not at all surprising. My above point still stands.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 11, 2010 at 2346 hrs
Yes ,the porpulation is very big, so we must do something to control it.
Posted by christian louboutin on August 12, 2010 at 0253 hrs
Even it is 1% - it’s still way too much. The 14th admendment was for people who were brought here against their will - not for those looking for a free ride.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 12, 2010 at 0615 hrs
According to Harry Reid, that would be 340,000 defacto Democrats born each year.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 12, 2010 at 0747 hrs
Why do conservatives hate babies?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 12, 2010 at 0906 hrs
Why do conservatives hate babies?
Saw this cited somewhere else today:
The liberal baby bustChildlessness and small families are increasingly the norm today among progressive secularists. As a consequence, an increasing share of all children born into the world are descended from a share of the population whose conservative values have led them to raise large families.
I guess for American Progressives, conceiving future Democrats is another “job” Americans don’t want to do that illegal immigrants are willing to perform.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 12, 2010 at 0916 hrs
...unauthorized immigrants…
So they simply lack “authorization.”
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 12, 2010 at 1023 hrs
How does any portion or admendment to the constitution apply to a non-citizen, and someone who is here ILLEGALLY to boot?
“Why do conservatives hate babies? “
I don’t know - why do liberals love lawbreakers?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 12, 2010 at 1124 hrs
I can’t speak for liberals, but I like small children more than I like the law, and if the law would consign small children to a life of poverty and destitution, I’m against the law, not the children. I also don’t like taking away people’s rights, especially based on xenophobic nonsense.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 12, 2010 at 1219 hrs
The 14th amandment should have been made more specific so that Liberals would know it pertained to freed slaves only. Now they use it to justify border hopping by “unauthorized immigrants” who are 8.9 months pregnant who have their babies here so they can become eligible to get onto social programs and receive unwarranted benefits. It’s a Scam perpetrated against the American people that steals their hard earned wages to give to someone else
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 12, 2010 at 1312 hrs
There is a book called The resistance by Gemma Malley: In a future England where young people, or “Surpluses,” are heavily regulated and everyone takes a drug called Longevity.
The surpluses, unauthorized births, are locked up in poorly heated orphanages, poorly fed, and their basic education is to be told that they are unwanted burdens on society: If they behave and accept sterilization, they might get to become servants.Since (almost) every child has the potential to contribute (Adam Smith) to society or leach, be a taxpayer or a burden, be a citizen or a…, it’s a better bet to invest in their education, throw in some cheap food, vitamins, etc. I could name dozens of other state and private and federal taxpayer subsidized investments that have reaped far, far worse social and financial profit. Has anyone compared the cost of legally rounding up, holding, documenting, and shipping the lot back? Is this fiscally and ethically comparable to Lincoln’s choice at the end of the civil war? Food for thought.
Also note, it is popular for Chinese woman to come to the U.S. to have their babies. They go home, but the dual citizenship places the child at a distinct future career advantage.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 12, 2010 at 1447 hrs
We could just get rid of the Supreme Court and let Scott(I-C), Hater of His Daughter, to interpret any and all laws. The Divine Wisdom!
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 12, 2010 at 1448 hrs
“Now they use it to justify border hopping by “unauthorized immigrants” who are 8.9 months pregnant who have their babies here so they can become eligible to get onto social programs and receive unwarranted benefits.”
To the extent that this is true it’s a problem with wellfare programs, not a problem with immigration laws.
Scott, what did you do to become a citizen that is different from what these babies are doing?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 12, 2010 at 1553 hrs
How does any portion or admendment to the constitution apply to a non-citizen, and someone who is here ILLEGALLY to boot?
If a baby is born here, how is it here “illegally”?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 12, 2010 at 1614 hrs
Maybe the solution is aborting these godamn worthless fetuses.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 12, 2010 at 1807 hrs
The 14th Amendment to the Constitution stipulates that those children automatically become U.S. citizens
It does NO SUCH THING, except that Brennan said so. And we all know that Brennan was comfy with babykilling, too…
Posted by dad29 on August 12, 2010 at 1809 hrs
If a baby is born here, how is it here “illegally”?
I would guess it’s here illegally because the parents are here illegally. I’d think that was pretty simple to understand.
If the 14th amendment were modified from:
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.
to:
All persons born to a citizen or legal resident of the United States, and all persons naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.
Simple as that, and nothing unfair about it. Our laws would be no different than those in other western nations.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 12, 2010 at 1815 hrs
BTW, the constitution should also say something that about all citizens must speak American (not Mexican). The official language should be AMERICAN.
Not English.
AMERICAN.
And in case people can’t read, the constitution says that NO LAWS shall infringe on the right to bear arms.
What part of “shall not be infringed” can’t the liberal gun grabbers understand?
Now the lie-berals want psychological tests to buy a gun! That’s first thing then coomies did when they took over Russia. Anyone who disagreed with them was considered mentally ill.
IS THIS WHAT YOU WANT?!?
TERM LIMITS!!!
All of these mexicans are going to turn this god fearing constitutional republic of ours into a Vatican colony.
Wake up America!
This country right now is being run by a pack of young fools.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 12, 2010 at 1840 hrs
What happened to conservatives not wanting to tinker with the Constitution?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 12, 2010 at 2011 hrs
What happened to conservatives not wanting to tinker with the Constitution?
Conservatives don’t mind legally changing the Constitution by making amendments… what conservatives are against is a judge or two changing the meaning of the words in a Clintonesque fashion to interpret them to say things that they clearly don’t say.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 12, 2010 at 2030 hrs
All of these mexicans are going to turn this god fearing constitutional republic of ours into a Vatican colony.
Sorry, but you are kind of a knob for making that statement.
Do you have any idea how many of your neighbors are probably Catholic as well? I know that I am… Vatican colony indeed… you make a good argument FOR those psychological tests.
Do you have any idea how many god fearing Americans were former citizens of Mexico and immigrated legally to the United States? Lots of them are as much of a citizen as you are…. lots of them are probably in Iraq and Afghanistan right now, offering up their liberty so that you can use yours to be an insulting pin head?
Oh, and thanks for coming to my defense, Scott. Sheesh.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 12, 2010 at 2050 hrs
I have to wonder why, in the whole world, we are something like one of two countries that allows anyone born here to automatically become a citizen. Why doesn’t the rest of the world do that? As long as I’m asking questions, why do the liberal Democrats (progressives) see illegals as future voters?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 12, 2010 at 2116 hrs
I would guess it’s here illegally because the parents are here illegally. I’d think that was pretty simple to understand.
I’m not sure you could be any more wrong with your “guess”. The Constitution says very clearly that if a baby is born here, it is American, not ‘here illegally.’
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 12, 2010 at 2221 hrs
I would guess it’s here illegally because the parents are here illegally. I’d think that was pretty simple to understand.
Except you’re wrong. I’d think that was pretty simple to understand. Just because you want it to be illegal doesn’t mean the Constitution doesn’t say what it says it does.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 12, 2010 at 2237 hrs
I have to wonder why, in the whole world, we are something like one of two countries that allows anyone born here to automatically become a citizen. Why doesn’t the rest of the world do that?
I have to wonder why, in the whole world, we are something like one of ten or so countries that executes it’s own citizens on a regular basis.
Our laws would be no different than those in other western nations.
So when it comes to issues like immigration, you want us to be more like other Western Nations, but when it comes to issues like the death penalty and health care you don’t want us to be like other Western Nations? I thought everyone else was evil socialists and we had to resist the urge to be like them…
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 12, 2010 at 2240 hrs
I have to wonder why, in the whole world, we are something like one of ten or so countries that executes it’s own citizens on a regular basis.
One of ten?? Regular Basis??
Not even close to the facts VAP…. not even close.
I thought everyone else was evil socialists and we had to resist the urge to be like them…
Good immigration policy is not a socialist idea. Perhaps if you could get past the glaring generalizations, you’d make more sense of the issue. Government run health care is clearly a bad plan. Just because a nation embraces it does not necessarily mean that other aspects of that nations government are not worthy of emulation though.
You mention the death penalty (which is the law of the land in more of the world than not). I, personally, do not agree with government having a hand in executing people. I also don’t agree with the slaughter of innocent people because they are inconvenient to the parent, as we do with abortion. You seem pretty liberal there, VAP… do you also stand against abortion, or is it just convicted criminals that you an issue with killing?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 13, 2010 at 0753 hrs
VAPol:
I have to wonder why, in the whole world, we are something like one of ten or so countries that executes it’s own citizens on a regular basis.
Yet no problem with the murder of unborn children? What have they done to deserve a death sentence? You have no idea as to the potential good these unwanted “fetuses” could bring to the world, where as we know exactly what misery murderers and rapists wreak upon their victims. Your compassion is warped.
So when it comes to issues like immigration, you want us to be more like other Western Nations, but when it comes to issues like the death penalty and health care you don’t want us to be like other Western Nations? I thought everyone else was evil socialists and we had to resist the urge to be like them
We are America! We have laws that have been ignored far too long, and it has done nothing but create a situation where we are over burdened by “social programs”. We can’t sustain this welfare state, especially when Liberals are destroying the tax base with their anti business and anti manufacturing policies, and we don’t need the added burden of illegal immigrants to further stress the situation.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 13, 2010 at 0816 hrs
Conservatives: Tough On Babies
I like that slogan. You guys should totally use it. It really captures how you favor laws that hurt small children.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 13, 2010 at 0850 hrs
PaulNoonan: I like that slogan. You guys should totally use it. It really captures how you favor laws that hurt small children.
I like that post. It really captures how you’re ignorant about Conservatives.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 13, 2010 at 1156 hrs
Did anyone consider there is precedence here?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plyler_v._Doe
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 13, 2010 at 1305 hrs
How old is too old to deport these un-American Americans back to the country of their illegal parents citizenship?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 13, 2010 at 1552 hrs
“Conservatives: Tough On Babies”
Ha ha. How about “Conservatives: Following France’s Lead”
Or “Conservatives: Shrugging off the Constitution so that Government Can Get Bigger”
Or “Conservatives: Anti-Free Trade”
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 13, 2010 at 1825 hrs
Did anyone consider there is precedence here?
Yes, some liberal judges reinterpreted the Constitution to mean something it clearly does not say… sort of like when they discovered that the Constitution allowed abortion.
Of course. if we amend the Constitution, that ruling would be invalidated by the new amendment. The people could take back government from an activist court that way.
How old is too old to deport these un-American Americans back to the country of their illegal parents citizenship?
There are no un-American Americans (well… as long as we don’t count our current resident of the White House and others of that progressive ilk), but there are people who are residing in this nation illegally who are citizens of other countries.
That said, I suspect a new amendment, or a mild revision of the 14th to more clearly address modern issues, would not be retroactive. If you are already a citizen, you’d stay a citizen.
If we made a new amendment and then followed that up with stricter border enforcement and harsh penalties for any employer hiring illegal immigrants, we might actually be able to solve our problem with very little in the way of deportation. If there were no jobs, no citizenship, and no benefits, the people seeking those things would likely return home to their own nations.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 13, 2010 at 1842 hrs
We are the only country in the World that gives citizenship to babies born to non-citizens. They come for the welfare, food stamps, health care and housing.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 13, 2010 at 2255 hrs
Constitution stipulates that those children automatically become U.S. citizens, but some members of Congress are pushing to change that provision. That effort rooted in the debate over illegal immigration, particularly of people from Mexico.
Posted by Homeowners Association on August 14, 2010 at 0911 hrs
Eliminate the incentive and you can begin to address the problem. Unless and until we stiffen the penalties for hiring undocumented, cheap labor this will continue to be an absurd example of how we inexplicably choose to treat the symptoms instead of the disease.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 14, 2010 at 1022 hrs
Eliminating the free health care and education would also be a huge disencentive.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 14, 2010 at 1640 hrs
Rachel Maddow: Exposing Private Prison Industry Role in Shaping Arizona’s Anti-Immigration Law (Interesting comments).
Side note: I am not surprised some people would push for illegal immigrant imprisonment to make money;however, whether or not it’s tied to some Republicans is self serving political pandering; I’m sure some so called Dems and a host of apathetic, up, down and in between political leanings would profit. Wasn’t it during the Clinton era private prisons became profitable? Ties That Bind: Arizona Politicians and the Private Prison Industry
‘Anchor Babies’ Could Be Ariz.‘s Next Target:
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 14, 2010 at 2300 hrs
As a fellow Aggie and educator, I was apalled by your blog post on Challenge Day. Teaching at a school where a large percentage of my students live in project housing, raised by single moms or other relatives, I deal with students who have had little exposure to people different than themselves and have been raised to fight first, ask questions later. Being a middle school teacher, I see first hand the results of endless bullying and torment that kids go through, and Challenge Day provides ways for kids to become tolerant and understanding of others around them. As for the fact that they are kept in a room, your arguments are ridiculous. They are in there with 25-35 teachers, and the leaders from Challenge Day are trained individuals. I read a few of your other posts and honestly am disgusted to know that ignorant people such as yourself were allowed into the most wonderful and loving university around, much less a member of the Corps of Cadets. My father, a former Ross Volunteer, Class of ‘71, would be embarassed to know that you represent the men coming out of there, and that your blog is named after such noble parts of our tradition.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 15, 2010 at 1827 hrs
-
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 16, 2010 at 0741 hrs
Illegal immigration is reeking havoc on many states in this country. It is throwing our social services system out of balance, and causing the quality of public education to slide. The illegal immigrants and their children are a drain on hospitals, and health care in general, and we are seeing states nearing bankruptcy because of the incredible added strain.
As I see it, the right is the only side even bringing any ideas to the table. The left is truly being the “party of no” on this one, with absolutely no ideas about how to approach the issue. Their dear leader is treading water on the subject, and filing lawsuits…
We need to address this issue. I am perfectly willing to hear some ideas from the left, but the only thing you guys seem to be bringing to the table is a bucket of spittle, such as “Conservatives: tough on babies”, despite the advocacy of legalized murder of babies by your side.
Grow up, and bring some ideas to the table, because right now illegal immigrants are stealing from the American poor who need, and actually have a legal claim to the social services that we provide them.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 16, 2010 at 0741 hrs
“Progressives: Rehashing the same garbage ideas for 100 years” come celebrate our centennial of bad ideas!
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 16, 2010 at 0743 hrs
Illegal immigration is reeking havoc on many states in this country. It is throwing our social services system out of balance, and causing the quality of public education to slide.
And if they were legal immigrants there would be a snowballs chance in hell that they wouldn’t be reeking havoc on any state in this country by throwing our social services system out of balance, and causing the quality of public education to slide.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 16, 2010 at 1056 hrs
A great majority of immigrants who skip the formalities and cross into the US do so to work. If this work was not available, the immigrants would stay where they are or go elsewhere.
Who is providing these jobs? Why aren’t we insisting that THESE people/companies reduce the demand? Why are we ignoring and enabling the proponents of cheap, foreign labor at the expense of our health care, education, and security?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 16, 2010 at 1132 hrs
Joe Mamma:
A great majority of immigrants who skip the formalities and cross into the US do so to work. If this work was not available, the immigrants would stay where they are or go elsewhere.
A great many lazy welfare recipients operate on the same principal. Take the welfare away and have those people do these jobs and you take care of two problems, and lower taxes to boot.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 16, 2010 at 1201 hrs
Yeah, I keep saying everyone knows someone who is scamming unemployment and everyone knows someone who is living rent-free in a pre-foreclosed home.
It’s f*cking ridiculous.
Posted by Smeety on August 16, 2010 at 1240 hrs
If all of these babies are a problem for you, there was this really smart guy who came up with a solution:
http://art-bin.com/art/omodest.html
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 16, 2010 at 1648 hrs
I same we do like they do in Red China.
Abort the little god damn brown bastards.
GIG ‘EM!
- Added note from Owen… this comment came from the same IP address as Adam Young who is posting from a UW Madison IP address and is in a similar tenor. Since he is clearly sockpuppeting, he has violated our terms of service and will be banned if it happens again. But I wanted you all to see his hate for what it is.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 16, 2010 at 2022 hrs
IP Madison seems to have his little brain filled with liberal mush. He probably thought he was doing a good deed by exposing how racist the typical conservative poster is.
The unfortunate thing he has in common with those groups trying to pin the tag of racism on the Tea Party is that it’s the accusers who are the only ones showing any signs of bigotry. Sad.
I hope IP Madison can get a transfer to Hillsdale. Maybe they can deprogram him a bit.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 17, 2010 at 0040 hrs
Total Entries: 19997
Total Comments: 134021
Most Recent Entry: 05/24/2012 06:25 am
Most Recent Comment on: 05/24/2012 12:07 pm
Total Members: 9751
Total Logged in members: 0
Total guests: 129
Total anonymous users: 0
Most Recent Visitor on: 05/24/2012 12:54 pm
The most visitors ever was 538 on 12/01/2007 02:11 pm
Protected and licensed under a Creative Commons License (some rights reserved).