Sunday, January 21, 2018

"Anchor Babies" and "Dreamers"







"Until we secure our borders, end chain migration, eliminate the visa lottery system, our 'dreamer' issue is bound to repeat. I really don't believe this is what our Founders had in mind for this country."



Yesterday I made a huge boo-boo on a post. I confused "anchor babies" with "dreamers". I was corrected gently by a friend of mine, and then not so gently (and rightly so) by someone I don't know, when she called my article "fake news". In reality, due to the magnitude of the error, it was "fake news". I issued a mea culpa on the article, and then on my FB page. But it is over, I have taken the article down (even though I corrected it), and it is time to move on.

But out of everything bad can come some good. It allowed me to think deeper about our immigration system. Why it is so confusing. Why it is so controversial. Coming into this country we have people who are legal immigrants, illegal immigrants, refugees and asylum seekers, chain migration, visa lottery, TPS (Temporary Protective Status), I-9 visa holders, student visa holders, and so forth. Is our immigration broken like so many on the Left believe it is? No, but we have sure made it about as complicated as it need be.

A word about "anchor babies", even though it is the "dreamers" right now which are getting all the press. Every now an again, the "anchor baby" issue pops up to the surface. Does our Constitution allow for anyone born on United States soil to be a citizen? Yes. Under the Fourteen Amendment, it does. This Amendment, originally penned in 1868, was part of reconstruction after the Civil War. It was to ensure former slaves were treated fairly - that they would be considered to be citizens. That WAS the intent.

Do you want to know how our immigration system has becomes so abused? Here is one example. A few years ago on a cable show, I remember people from two opposing sides discussing the "anchor baby" issue. First off, many on the Left hate that term. They think it is disrespectful. Then the discussion turned to the "unfairness" of breaking up families. Again, someone on the Left suggested that if a baby was born here, we should make all efforts to keep the family together. In other words, make the parents legal also, just to keep the family together. Not to have the entire family stay together by going back to their country of origin. Nope. The entire family stays together and stays here - legally.

So how do we fix the "dreamer" issue? These kids who were dragged across the border by illegal parents? How do we keep those families together? If we granted amnesty to those "dreamers", whose numbers range somewhere between 800,000 and 4,000,000, what about the rest of the illegal family? Can you already hear the Left clamoring to let all the family stay over here? Maybe even grandma and grandpa or aunts and uncles. Is this starting to sound a bit like chain migration?

Why is this issue so important to President Trump and the Republicans in Congress? That fixing the "dreamer" issue needs to be coupled with fixing some parts of our immigration system? Because they, like the rest of us, have seen this movie before. Until we secure our borders, end chain migration, eliminate the visa lottery system, our "dreamer" issue is bound to repeat. I really don't believe this is what our Founders had in mind for this country.


28 comments:

  1. James Madison opined: “It is no doubt very desirable that we should hold out as many inducements as possible for the worthy part of mankind to come and settle amongst us, and throw their fortunes into a common lot with ours.
    But why is this desirable?”
    Not because “diversity” is our greatest value.
    No, not because Big Business needed cheap labor.
    And no, Madison asserted, “Not merely to swell the catalogue of people.
    No, sir, it is to increase the wealth and strength of the community; and those who acquire the rights of citizenship, without adding to the strength or wealth of the community are not the people we are in want of.”
    Madison argued plainly that America should welcome the immigrant who could assimilate, but exclude the immigrant who could not readily “incorporate himself into our society.”

    ReplyDelete
  2. There is no national database of crimes committed by undocumented immigrants or study that tracked the crimes they have committed. The challenge in finding concrete numbers is due to a shortfall of data.

    The number of undocumented immigrants in the U.S. tripled between the 1990s and 2013, while violent crime declined 48% and property crime fell 41% over that period.

    2015 National Academy of Sciences study found: Immigrants are in fact much less likely to commit crime than natives, and the presence of large numbers of immigrants seems to lower crime rates.

    The study added that this disparity also holds for young men most likely to be undocumented immigrants: Mexican, Salvadoran, and Guatemalan men.

    Today, the belief that immigrants are more likely to commit crimes is perpetuated by ‘issue entrepreneurs’ who promote the immigrant-crime connection in order to drive restrictionist immigration policy.

    The whole issue is driven by GOP political strategy, not fact.

    Looks like the north suburbs will be on the short end of the snowfall totals. Lucky you! Go Vikings!


    ReplyDelete
  3. Democratic Sen. Tammy Duckworth of Illinois, who lost both of her legs during an explosion in Iraq while serving in the US Army, blasted 45 as a "five-deferment draft dodger" during her remarks on the Senate floor Saturday.

    "I spent my entire adult life looking out for the well-being, the training, the equipping of the troops for whom I was responsible. I will not be lectured about what our military needs by a five-deferment draft dodger," Duckworth said on Saturday.

    Duckworth was responding to 45's tweet from early Saturday that said Democrats like her are responsible for the government shutdown and don't care about the military because service members are expected to work without pay for the duration of the shutdown.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Oh, come now, Representative Duckworth, I don't think you can comment on somebody else's opinion of what the military needs when you just voted against PAYING them.

    Sometimes I wonder why we even listen when these politicians say stupid stuff

    ReplyDelete
  5. Why did my generation of seniors, who were modest people, honest and decent, become the leading cheerleaders of a man who is the vulgar inverse of all that?
    I've been talking to the folks here in Sun City, mostly older GOP folks and they have a theory: They got tired of their assigned role of "oppressor" of every special interest that had a beef with the country. US politics went scorched earth on them, so they went scorched earth on the US. Now they've got beefs. And a miserable SOB to tweet them.
    Made some sense to this snowflake.
    Don't know where we'll go from here, but I hope the shutdown lasts long enough for a few congress men and women to vote their hearts and not their party. I would hate to see the nuclear option enacted, as that would lead to a Democratic majority Senate after 2018 elections to wield too much power.
    Senate is supposed to be the deliberative body, but we haven't seen much deliberation or compromise since turn of the century.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I agree with most of what you said and I have pretty well confirmed my belief that basic human nature in the forms of "confirmation bias," "the iron law of knowledge," "instant gratification" and "let George do it," coupled with 24/7 news, the Internet and ubiquitous social media have us to the point where we simply do not THINK anymore, let alone deliberate. We "feel," instantly, so the quickest one to a microphone who can claim either victim status or defender of the victim in a quotable 7-second soundbite wins the day. It is why I have such high hopes for the phrase "Schumer Shutdown."

    ReplyDelete
  7. As for the topic at hand, I would point out that every single illegal immigrant has committed at least one crime – the crime of illegal entry or "illegal presence" – and most likely many other crimes just to remain here. Driving without a license, failure to pay taxes, misrepresentation, identity theft, theft of government services, to name just a few. It is one reason why I am adamantly opposed to any amnesty, the other being that it just begets more lawbreaking.

    I also have what I consider a reasonable compromise for the DACA situation. It is simply to hold those proponents to their own argument, the one that says we would be deporting kids from "the only country they have ever known." So what I propose is this: if you were brought here [illegally] by your parents, before the age of five, and remained in this country without a brush with the law, graduate from high school and either have a job or join the military, you can stay. You are for all intents and purposes a good American.

    Of course this does not apply to people who were 14-year-olds, walked across the border by themselves and promptly joined up with a drug gang, which seems to be what the Democrats are pushing for.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Please don't discount the economic impact of illegals....
    It’s true that not all undocumented workers pay federal income and social security taxes; many are still paid in cash and never fill out W-2 forms, so it’s unclear how many of them independently file tax returns as self-employed contractors.
    The Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, a Washington, D.C., think tank, estimates that about half of undocumented workers in the United States pay income taxes.
    They also help fund public schools and local government services by paying sales and property taxes like any other resident.
    This added up to about $10.6 billion in state and local taxes annually.
    Illegals have paid 1.3 Trillion dollars in Social Security that they will never collect. They are virtually funding the baby boomer increases.
    As for the rest of what you speak, plenty of deplorables and snowflakes are guilty of those offenses also. My mother drove without a license for years, when she couldn't pass the eye test. Small town, groceries and mail runs.
    Your bigotry belittles you.

    ReplyDelete
  9. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  10. And these immigrants aren't taking any money out of your pocket..

    42 people now own the same wealth as the bottom 3.7 billion people.

    It estimated that $2.4 trillion will be inherited by the heirs of billionaires over the next 20 years, an amount larger than the GDP of India, a country of 1.3 billion people.

    The increased rewards for shareholders and corporate executives are at the expense of workers and the wealthy are able to exercise excessive influence over 45's policy-making.

    ReplyDelete
  11. "… plenty of deplorables and snowflakes are guilty of those offenses also." and they are committing crimes when they do so. So your proposal is that the noncitizens get amnesty and the citizens go to jail? To quote my fifth grader, "that's messed up."

    But of course if you believe that making rich people poor will make poor people rich it is not as much of a logical disconnect as one might think.

    ReplyDelete
  12. oh, and bigotry? Please do not diminish your otherwise sensible arguments with flippant ad hominem. The only bigotry at work here is an intolerance of criminal behavior, a necessity for a civilized society.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Non-shutdown over. Dreamers left hanging. ICE can start rounding them up for transportation home (uh, no, this is their home), transportation to some shithole country then have read about but never visited.

    ReplyDelete
  14. are you telling me that the shutdown is over and without an agreement on DACA? I expected that would be the eventual outcome, but not so soon Democrats are usually far more reluctant to admit they have a losing hand. There was no need for DACA to be part of this appropriations bill. It is a separate issue and does not need to be dealt with at all until March (so sooner is better obviously).

    As for your concerns about "Dreamers" just look at my proposal above. I would separate "Dreamers" from DACA, and treat them as separate cases. All Dreamers are covered by DACA, but not all covered by DACA are Dreamers.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Should the snowflake program called CHIP been part of this deal?
      I'm not sure what should be in/out of CR's

      Delete
  15. 45 gives lip service to helping the DACA kids, but deplorables will view this as amnesty pure and simple. The kids are toast!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And he always turns to the loudest applause and that will be his beer swilling gap toothed white trash base.

      Delete
  16. Gee, thanks for the massive insult to 30 million people or so.

    There seems to be this determination to find Fault with everything Trump does or says, with no discrimination applied to what is actually done or said. That's not logical; it's pure hatred and no way to run a country. For example, Trump has said he believes there is a "compassionate solution" for the Dreamers, but that it must include a fix to preclude our having to do this again and again. On what rational yet compassionate basis can one object to this in general?

    it seems it is Democrats who want to muddy the water. Understand that all Dreamers are covered by DACA, but not all of those covered by DACA are Dreamers. One should stay, the others need to be thoroughly vetted with the prejudice being for sending them home.

    ReplyDelete
  17. What 45 says he believes should not be confused with the truth!

    ReplyDelete
  18. What 45 says is not always a lie. AND.... since roughly 5 times as many people trust Trump as trust the media or Congress, well... Truth is where you find it, regardless of who speaks it.

    But to the matter at hand, there is a center ground here. Be compassionate to the true Dreamers, and the heck with the gang-bangers and ne'er-do-wells. The little kids are a problem but if they're being good citizens and there are not too many of them (I don't know), we find a way to allow them to stay.

    Those who walked across the border and joined gangs but are still under 16 (or were at the time) need to be sent home, just like any other illegal immigrant.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The unofficial rules of the Democrat Party say that any lie in pursuit of good policy is justified. It isn't "nice," but Trump was elected because he played by the same rules as the Left, and they are outraged by it. And that's the OTHER reason he was elected.

      Is there any reason why Trump's clear objectives on immigration should be considered invalid, just because you don't like him?

      Delete
    2. He is very clear on the lottery, the wall, chain migration and moderately clear on extreme vetting. He doesn't have a clue regarding the complexities regarding DACA or dreamers, and doesn't have the patience or intellect to learn.

      Delete
    3. Sez you. Not be insulting even by inference, but I have long known that anybody who disagrees with a liberal is either stupid, or evil, or both. Automatically. Just because his views don't comport with yours does not mean he does not have well-thought-through ideas and reasons, and you have no way of knowing, one way or the other.

      By the way, WHAT complexities? What part of "illegal" do you not understand?

      Delete
  19. Herr Millers Mess
    One conservative staffer who was on the White House call and opposes granting citizenship to 1.8 million undocumented immigrants said: "This is the beginning of the end of the GOP majority in the House. In a year when the Democrats impeach 45, we can point to this moment."

    ReplyDelete
  20. Liberals have their dreams, and their Dreamers. Somebody had a good idea the other day. They proposed that we allow Dreamers legal status and an eventual path to citizenship, but with NO vote until 2047. The belief is that Democrats would abandon their cause in a heartbeat (if they had one).

    ReplyDelete