As we start to learn more about H.R. 1940, also known as the “Birthright Citizenship Act of 2007,” it made me think back to our Cutting Edge-a talk show interview with Congressional Candidate, and former Congressman, Bob “B-1” Dornan that we conducted on Feb 20th 2004. At that time Bob was competing against Congressman Dana Rohrabacher (R 46) in the Republican Primary.
H.R. 1940, co-sponsored by Mr. Deal, Mr Bilbray and Dan Lungren (of CA) would “amend section 301 of the Immigration and Nationality Act to clarify those classes of individuals born in the United states who are nationals and citizens of the United states at birth.” The actual text can be found at http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill+h110-1940
Note: As this site may be down simply go to Google.com and type H.R. 1940 which will lead yo to two links on the legislation.
The issue can be summed up in two words. “Anchor babies.” Those individuals who come to this country to have their babies with no intention of becoming American citizens with all of the perks that we lay at their feet.
Roughly 27 minutes into that one hour program I asked the former Congressman if he would support a Constitutional Amendment to Section 1 of the XIV Amendment wherein the “anchor baby” provision be removed. He agreed. You can view and hear Bob in his own words discussing the immigration issue by simply going to the Archive section of our web site and click on the Essential Dornan link.
www.cuttingedge-atalkshow.com
Removing this open door for immediate public benefits is one solution to the reduction of illegal immigration into this country.
That’s my thoughts. What are yours?
Or is it to keep Mexicans down. These babies did not committ a crime, they were born here and deserve the full rights of citizens. Many of them will grow up here and consider the United States their only home. Only now they do not even have a country. Not even Mexico will considere these babies, citizens. How can people be so cruel and heartless? Of course this is coming from so-called Christians and Catholics who love the pound the Bible in everyone’s face.
Larry you love to throw around the phrase “its not about you.” PRACTICE WHAT YOU PREACH! Stop making it because you supposedly want less roads and lower taxes and other problems you claim these children cause to make your own life easier. Jesus is watching all you anti-immigrant activists my friend, and he does not like what he sees.
Why do you cons hate the U.S. Constitution so much?
If people were having babies for the “perks” they’d soon discover they don’t exist and then stop with one baby – which of course they don’t. Nobody says I’m poor so I won’t have children.
It’s JOBS, JOBS, JOBS – and if you want that to stop then deport the traitorous, disloyal americans who employ those without work permits and stop blaming people for coming here to work.
I find the term “anchor babies” to be a despicable and degrading term. Perhaps if you want the debate on the issue of immigration to take on a more respectable tone then you will refrain from using such a term.
The term anchor babies, like illegal immigrant are word wars designed to incite and create a boogie man that’s an easy target to discredit, denegrate and dehumanize.
As far as Dornan. I rememember him from his days on the Westside when the chatter was very loud about his abusive ways within the Dornan household. Daddy Dearest.
Yep, birds of feather do flock together.
Holy Spirit.
On one point we can agree. These babies did not commit a crime. However their parents do by coming into this country through the back door instead of the front door where there already exists a long line of people waiting their turn.
And I do “practice what I preach.” I do not break the law.
Nor is it safe for mothers to be crossing the hot desert on foot while eight or nine months pregnant so that their child will be born on US soil. Can we also agree on that fact?
And get off your soap box by referring to the bible. There is nothing about the bible in the pending legislation nor my post.
And to Sean. I did not create the phrase “anchor babies” but it has been widely used by the media to get your attention as a reader. I agree that our focus should be on the parents on those yet to be born children who are creating this debate.
hey gila,
how do you feel about americans owning guns. any guns. large automatic guns.with large multi round clips and magazines.
Anonymous #3. 12:45 p.m.
If we aren’t providing perks than can we agree that you will not mind if we cut them off?
As to people coming here for jobs let me respond by saying that we do have an active immigration policy.
My son-in-law had to be sponsored to come to this country. He played by the rules and waited his turn. What’s so wrong with that basic fact of life?
Should we have two sets of rules. One for those who follow the law and another for those coming here illegally? Everyone should be treated equally.
Holy Spirit.
What a lack of respect labelling yourself “Holy Spirit” but you can call yourself whatevever you wish including Adolph Hitler.
You made some comments that also deserve a response.
i.e. “Stop making it because you supposedly want less roads and lower taxes and other problems you claim these children cause to make your own life easier.” Those are your words. Now show me where I made any of these charges in one of my posts.
Sean. You challenge my use of words in this post that you call degrading yet engaged in a black vs white debate in your post about Barry Bonds. One would hope that that the race issue was no longer open for criticism. Are you the self appointed Juice magistrate on acceptable content and text? Let’s move past this and focus on compliance to our Constitution as it relates to the immigration issue. And let us not overlook enforcement of the law as it relates to the employers hiring those who are here illegally.
1:19 PM —
I am a second amendment supporter and support the right of Americans to own firearms.
Larry,
In regards to my Barry Bonds post I asked the question if race was an issue, I did not say that it was the case.
Feel free to use all the despicable, degrading and dehumanizing language that you want. If you feel that it is okay to so in regards to language directed at children then that says a lot about you.
As long as you and your cohorts engage in these type of demonization tactics the debate will remain at the gutter level with you folks.
Sean. Very slick.
You “asked if race was an issue.” Knowing it wasn’t what prompted you to write the post. As I am older than you and grew up in a mixed race neighborhood of Newark NJ I lived through that period. In my lifetime I recall flying into the Augusta GA airport and passed a “colored only” water cooler as I went to use the “whites only” restroom. Don’t open old sores for the sake of a story that you created.
And respectfuly,
“As long as you and your cohorts engage in these type of demonization tactics the debate will remain at the gutter level with you folks.” Cute. And that’s what you know or think about Larry Gilbert. By the way. Who are my cohorts Sean? Does this post hit a nerve? Demonization you say. Sneaking across the border to drink from the public troth is simply unacceptable to those of us who abide by the rules and fund the services used by those here illegally. End of story Sean.
Have at me if you must.
“Don’t open old sores for the sake of a story that you created.”
Old sores? Am I to believe that racism is dead in America according to you Larry? Or am I just supposed to keep quiet about it?
You can discuss the issue of illegal immigration without dehumanizing folks. If you feel that you must use the term “anchor babies” to get your point accross, that is just sad.
Sean,
I can answer for you. Conservatives believe racism against anyone but white people no longer exists. They believe all racism now, is against white people. You can read more in Ignorance to Enlightenment Part 7 where I expose the conservative Catholics who thought this way.
Sean. Think about how far this nation has come over the past few hundred years with regard to black Americans. Without providing a lengthy list of names simply look at your party candidate for President who may get more Democratic support than Hillary.
Claudio.
Help me out here. I though Larry Elder was the sage.
Is HR 1940 a constitutional amendment? No
What a piece of BS.
Email response from north county:
It sounds like Ron Paul should be your candidate:
> End birthright citizenship. As long as illegal immigrants know
> their children born here will be citizens, the incentive to enter
> the U.S. illegally will remain strong.
Email reply from south county:
i wholeheartly agree but who will enforce this?
Cook.
Let me help you out by providing the following data. This is not a hoax but you can surely verify it with Snopes:
110th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. R. 1940
To amend section 301 of the Immigration and Nationality Act to clarify those classes of individuals born in the United States who are nationals and citizens of the United States at birth.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
April 19, 2007
Mr. DEAL of Georgia (for himself, Mr. BILBRAY, and Mr. DANIEL E. LUNGREN of California) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary
——————————————————————————–
A BILL
To amend section 301 of the Immigration and Nationality Act to clarify those classes of individuals born in the United States who are nationals and citizens of the United States at birth.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `Birthright Citizenship Act of 2007′.
SEC. 2. CITIZENSHIP AT BIRTH FOR CERTAIN PERSONS BORN IN THE UNITED STATES.
(a) In General- Section 301 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1401) is amended–
(1) by inserting `(a) IN GENERAL- ‘ before `The following’;
(2) by redesignating paragraphs (a) through (h) as paragraphs (1) through (8); and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
`(b) Definition- Acknowledging the right of birthright citizenship established by section 1 of the 14th amendment to the Constitution, a person born in the United States shall be considered `subject to the jurisdiction’ of the United States for purposes of subsection (a)(1) if the person is born in the United States of parents, one of whom is–
`(1) a citizen or national of the United States;
`(2) an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the United States whose residence is in the United States; or
`(3) an alien performing active service in the armed forces (as defined in section 101 of title 10, United States Code).’.
(b) Applicability- The amendment made by subsection (a)(3) shall not be construed to affect the citizenship or nationality status of any person born before the date of the enactment of this Act.
From the same web site you may also find the following info.:
110th U.S. Congress (2007-2008)
H.R. 1940: To amend section 301 of the Immigration and Nationality Act to clarify those classes of…
To amend section 301 of the Immigration and Nationality Act to clarify those classes of individuals born in the United States who are nationals and citizens of the United States at birth.
Bill Status
Apr 19, 2007 Introduced
– Scheduled for Debate
– Voted on in House
– Voted on in Senate
– Signed by President
This bill is in the first step in the legislative process. Introduced bills go first to committees that deliberate, investigate, and revise bills before they go to general debate. The majority of bills never make it out of committee.
Bill Overview
Sponsor: Rep. Nathan Deal [R-GA]hide cosponsors
Cosponsors
Rep. Todd Akin [R-MO]
Rep. Rodney Alexander [R-LA]
Rep. Spencer Bachus [R-AL]
Rep. Richard Baker [R-LA]
Rep. James Barrett [R-SC]
Rep. Brian Bilbray [R-CA]
Rep. Gus Bilirakis [R-FL]
Rep. John Boozman [R-AR]
Rep. Kevin Brady [R-TX]
Rep. Ken Calvert [R-CA]
Rep. John Carter [R-TX]
Rep. Howard Coble [R-NC]
Rep. Michael Conaway [R-TX]
Rep. John Culberson [R-TX]
Rep. David Davis [R-TN]
Rep. Geoff Davis [R-KY]
Rep. Jo Ann Davis [R-VA]
Rep. Thelma Drake [R-VA]
Rep. John Duncan [R-TN]
Rep. Tom Feeney [R-FL]
Rep. James Forbes [R-VA]
Rep. Elton Gallegly [R-CA]
Rep. John Gingrey [R-GA]
Rep. Louis Gohmert [R-TX]
Rep. Virgil Goode [R-VA]
Rep. Robert Goodlatte [R-VA]
Rep. Robin Hayes [R-NC]
Rep. Jeb Hensarling [R-TX]
Rep. Walter Herger [R-CA]
Rep. Duncan Hunter [R-CA]
Rep. Darrell Issa [R-CA]
Rep. Samuel Johnson [R-TX]
Rep. Walter Jones [R-NC]
Rep. Jim Jordan [R-OH]
Rep. John Linder [R-GA]
Rep. Daniel Lungren [R-CA]
Rep. Kenny Marchant [R-TX]
Rep. Thaddeus McCotter [R-MI]
Rep. Howard McKeon [R-CA]
Rep. John Mica [R-FL]
Rep. Gary Miller [R-CA]
Rep. Jeff Miller [R-FL]
Rep. Sue Myrick [R-NC]
Rep. Randy Neugebauer [R-TX]
Rep. Mike Pence [R-IN]
Rep. Ted Poe [R-TX]
Rep. Tom Price [R-GA]
Rep. Peter Sessions [R-TX]
Rep. Christopher Shays [R-CT]
Rep. Mark Souder [R-IN]
Rep. Clifford Stearns [R-FL]
Rep. John Sullivan [R-OK]
Rep. Thomas Tancredo [R-CO]
Rep. Zach Wamp [R-TN]
Rep. David Weldon [R-FL]
Rep. Lynn Westmoreland [R-GA]
Rep. Addison Wilson [R-SC]
Cosponsorship information sometimes is out of date. Why?
Last Action: May 4, 2007: Referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law.
Full Text: View Full Text of Bill
Committee Assignments
This bill is in the first stage of the legislative process where the bill is considered in committee and may undergo significant changes in markup sessions. The bill has been referred to the following committees:
House Judiciary
House Judiciary, Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law
Dear Larry,
In matters of immigration you should be aware that treating people equally is not an objective of the law – its to put the interests of America first – and everybody is treated differently.
Just like our tax system isn’t designed to treat people equally, the objective is to raise money for the government.
Cubans just need to get one foot on land, those that are rich just need to invest a certain amount, those who marry an american (like your son-in-law) jump to the head of the line and those with certain skills get preferences. Poor people as usual get pushed to the rear of the line as just to apply for a visa costs about $100. There aren’t two sets of rules but more like two hundred sets of rules.
I see I struck a nerve Larry. What if I am the Holy Spirit speaking through here. You have just blasphemed me by comparing to Hitler.
Of course I could be some political stooge claiming to be the Holy Spirit. Or I could be a true Christian who is speaking with the blessing of the Holy Spirit. You don’t know do you Larry? So you make God out according to what you believe, and if someone approaches you with a message that God, in fact, thinks differently than your World View, you simply play the Hitler Card.
You right wingers are getting old with the Hitler card for everything. It is honestly getting tiresome.
But your defensive response means I speak the truth. It is about YOU why you show such little compassion towards children and support punishing them for their parents’ crimes. During the first nine months as a fetus, you are more concerned for its well-being than after it is born. After birth, they are now an “anchor baby” or “welfare babies” or whatever label you feel you have the right to give them because you are an arrogant American.
You anti-choice extremists make me sick to my stomach!
They are the Lords Children, not some Anchor Baby, as you choose to call them. They are your brother and sister in Christ. How will explain to Jesus on the last day that many of his children were nothing more than anchors on your society. Do you think he is going to accept your explanation that you chose your country before the LORD! How patronizing of you all, to think that the Lord God is always on America’s side.
You have made the choice of who your God is and God is aware. Are you prepared for the consequences? By the tone of your defensive post, you are thinking, you are conflicted with yourself. Look within yourself and you will find what Christ would want you to do.
Holy Spirit,
Larry is a good man. I may not agree with him on some of these issues, but he is not a “right-winger.” He is a thoughtful libertarian leaning Republican.
The real problem with immigration is that we don’t have a methodology to work with our friends south of us. But our businesses want cheap labor.
Why not issue work visas to any Mexican who wants to come here to work? Make them temporary and easily renewable. End of problem!
As for the babies, how does the rest of the world handle this? Surely there must be a standard of some sort?
Larry,
I think this is smoke and mirrors designed to raise campaign money.
The 14th Amendment changed the Constitution by spelling out that people born in USA are citizens of USA.
HR1940 is not a Constitutional amendment and does not take away citizenship from anyone born in USA.
With all the lawyers in congress, you would think they would know this.
(Are you going to be at the kid Olympics at Joyner park this morning?)
Holy Spirit.
I spoke to the Holy Spirit this morning and he has no clue as to who you are. Don’t interject religion into this discussion.
I will still pray for you to see the truth of the issue.
Anonymous 11:06 p.m.
Sorry to take the air out of your sail but my son-in-law became an American citizen before he married our daughter.
Just curious. But will the Mexican governmnet allow me to become a citizen of that country? What’s the process for this gringo to be accepted.
Good morning Cook.
As we are taking some friends to LAX in a few minutes I will not be attending the Joyner Park event which you mention. I can tell you that when I was a member of our Rotary Club I did support our Special Olympics for the children and participated in pancake breakfast fundraisers at a special ed school in Mission Viejo.
Dear Larry,
Your son-in-law had a sponsor, so depending on what kind of sponsor determines his position in the line. If it had been your daughter he’d of gone to the front, if it was his sister he’d be at the end and if it was an employer some where near the top. Legal immigrants aren’t treated equally – poor folks without sponsors don’t even get admitted to the line.
A similar process for Mexico or any other country.
Funny Larry that whenyou have no defense you run for the hills and claim we should not discuss religion. You did not speak with the Holy Spirit, what you spoke with was your own ego telling you to keep loving the fetus and hating the child. The Lord suffered on the cross everytime you referred to one of his children as an “anchor baby.”
11:34 a.m. agitator.
I’m done with responding to you.