« | »

Reid Wanted To End Anchor Babies In 1993

From the Washington Times:

1993 flip-flop: Sen. Reid introduced bill ‘clarifying’ birthright citizenship

Kerry Picket
Aug.13, 2010

For all the brouhaha over Republicans wanting to review the interpretation of the 14th Amendment, the citizenship/birthright clause, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat, once supported revising the current interpretation of the birthright citizenship clause in 1993.

Mr. Reid introduced a bill to the Senate Judiciary Committee as the Immigration Stabilization Act of 1993. The bill, which died in committee after it was referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration and Refugee Affairs,  includes tough immigration provisions that would make many wonder where Mr. Reid truly stands on the immigration and border debate.

Title X of the Reid introduced bill shows the Nevada Democrat took Senator Lindsey Graham’s, South Carolina Republican, idea on the interpretation of the 14th Amendment and documented it into legislation:

"TITLE X—CITIZENSHIP 4 SEC. 1001. BASIS OF CITIZENSHIP CLARIFIED.  In the exercise of its powers under section of the Fourteenth Article of Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, the Congress has determined and hereby declares that any person born after the date of enactment of this title to a mother who is neither a citizen of the United States nor admitted to the United States as a lawful permanent resident, and which person is a national or citizen of another country of which either of his or her natural parents is a national or citizen, or is entitled upon application to become a national or citizen of such country, shall be considered as born subject to the jurisdiction of that foreign country and not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States within the meaning of section 1 of such Article and shall therefore not be a citizen of the United States or of any State solely by reason of physical presence within the United States at the moment of birth."

Even the summary of the bill contains language that would offend many of Mr. Reid’s supporters who are pushing amnesty for illegal immigrants in the United States:

"A bill to curb criminal activity by aliens, to defend against acts of international terrorism, to protect American workers from unfair labor competition, and to relieve pressure on public services by strengthening border security and stabilizing immigration into the United States."

The Center for Immigration Studies, wrote about the failed bill in 1993, describing it this way:

Senator Harry Reid (D-NV) has introduced a comprehensive immigration reform bill (S. 1351) that includes a provision that would limit citizenship to those whose mothers are United States citizens or legal permanent residents. However, Senator Reid’s proposal is to amend only the Immigration and Nationality Act, not the Constitution. Additionally, Senator Alan Simpson (R-WY) is planning to propose an immigration reform package that will include a provision similar to that of Senator Reid’s. Whether or not Senator Simpson’s recommendation will limit the right to citizenship to only those whose mothers are citizens or legal residents remains to be seen.

Opponents of these proposals argue that they go against the fundamental traditions of the United States. The citizenship clause was originally written to guarantee citizenship to all freed slaves, thereby establishing a tradition of inclusiveness. On the other hand, those in favor of the proposals believe birthright citizenship to be an attraction to illegal immigration. Under current law, simply because a child is born on U.S. soil, he or she is entitled to all the benefits that U.S. citizenship entails, including federal welfare benefits and the right to vote. Additionally, when that child turns 21, he or she will be able to sponsor his or her parents, and other family members, to the United States under the family reunification provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act.

Mr. Reid has taken quite the 180 since he introduced his immigration bill in 1993. “They’ve either taken leave of their senses or their principles,” said Senator Reid of Republicans recently when asked about what he thought about the GOP push to clarify the 14th Amendment of the Constitution

Senator Reid is pointing out that he has since apologized for such untoward thoughts. Indeed, he claims this was (paraphrasing) ‘the low point’ of his career.

Let’s hope the Nevada voters prove him wrong in November.

This article was posted by Steve on Saturday, August 14th, 2010. Comments are currently closed.

9 Responses to “Reid Wanted To End Anchor Babies In 1993”

  1. jobeth says:

    Wet finger to the targeted voter wind…and alignment to the progressive mantra of the moment.

  2. proreason says:

    Ann Coulter had another great article that pointed out the authors of the 14th amendment, and the people who voted it into the constitution were insuring that the former slaves and their children could not be denied citizenship.

    Period.

    The societal suicide brain fart that allows women to sneak into the country illegally and then have babies that automatically become citizens was a lunatic wet dream slipped into a Supreme Court ruling on another topic. It’s as if some fairy tale judge had slipped in the words “proreason owns everything in the country” and nobody noticed it for 20 years. Then ms proreason notices it, and we demand that the country hand every dime over to us.. It’s that looney.

    No other country has it. The only people who want it are people who illegally enter the country, people who want to overthrow the country, and the looney ruling class who want more idiots who will vote for them as long as their palms are greased.

    On second thought, there is a lot of overlap between the last two categories.

  3. wardmama4 says:

    I’d laugh if at the same time we did not have a traitorous closet muslim who campaigned as a Christian (always was and always will be) now attempting to turn America into the latest (and greatest) conquest of the World caliphate radical islamic terrorists (and their enablers).

    These people should not only not be in power in gov but should be on trial, jailed and then never, ever allowed to vote, much less hold a position as a CEO, Union Leader, lobbyist, local, city, state or gov position or even ever be a school crossing guard. Again.

    I use to think what John ‘I served in Vietnam’ Kerry did (along with that bi-partisan RHINO hack McAmnesty) to MIA/POWs in 1990 was traitorous – this makes that look positively stellar in retrospect – These people’s sole intention is to completely destroy America and the American Way of Life.

    May they all rot in HELL.

    • jobeth says:

      WM,

      Your comment of “These people’s sole intention is to completely destroy America and the American Way of Life.” is right on the money!

      Until the average voter…both left AND right, understands what this WH bunch are really trying to accomplish, the general populace will continue to give passes, excuses and deny what WE know is a fact.

      We’ve always had the luxury to be lazy voters. Vote a letter… “R” or “D” and we’d be just fine. America seemed to be on auto pilot and we only had to make slight corrections every so often and then back on auto pilot. Back to our myopic home-life interests…and to forget “politics”…”I don’t mess with politics”

      As a general population, we’ve been spoiled.

      But its been our own fault and responsibility we are in the mess we are in. While America was sleeping, look who took over the controls and is about to scuttle the ship?

      Time to wake up America! Time to really pay attention to who is in the driver’s seat at the moment and kick his and his minions out.

      America MUST know that they ARE capable of the so called “not in America” behavior. These people are like a metastasized cancer in the American body. They will need to be fought for a very long time indeed. One operation in November and in 2012 won’t be enough.

      We must re-educate our children to our founding documents and founders. We must continue to dig into backgrounds etc…I’m on Glenn Beck’s bandwagon about this.

      I’m still hearing that, as obamacare was being argued the first time…my good friend…who voted for the “I won”..upon being told of the looming health care nightmare said…”It couldn’t happen here”.

      Haven’t seen her lately (snowbirds) but I wonder what she thinks now. i just hope she’s opened her eyes.

  4. Enthalpy says:

    Reid is an embarrassment and a disgrace to Nevada and to the United States.

  5. fallingpianos says:

    What is it with politicians like Reid? At one time, they had brains and common sense, but somehow along the way their brains disintegrated, and, since nature abhors a vacuum, the empty space has been replaced by some dysfunctional Frankensteinian… object… that is completely opposed to rational thought. Is it something in the Potomac?

    Same thing happened to Algore. At one time he was pro-life.

    • Rusty Shackleford says:

      Yes, fp, something happens. Given that politicians are elected by a very real, very obvious popularity contest, it naturally falls into place that they are very susceptible to “going along with the flow” whatever that flow happens to be. And, given that they can do such chameleon-esque things, their moral center is suspect and often becomes compromised in the back rooms and need to feed their egos and get re-elected.

      One would think that the politician would have enough strength-of-character to stay true to their center. But when that center turns out to be made of cheap clay and they change their position on things that really should stay consistent, it leaves the voter wondering what gives.

      This is what concerns me about those republicans currently running on a “conservative hard line”. It’s not that I don’t trust them. It’s that I trust them all too well. The trend of lying to get elected is nothing new. And there seems to be a very large number who lack the ability to understand that when they lie to the voters, then do whatever they want that it’s not only infuriating, it’s the cardinal sin of elected politics.

      That article in the American Spectator blog about The Ruling Class really spells it out very well. http://spectator.org/archives/2010/07/16/americas-ruling-class-and-the

      They act like spoiled brats and to hell with you and me. Again, they become very insulated and end up fearing and despising the very people who put them in their cushy DC job. Given the enormous number of current democrats who are avoiding their constituents this summer, it becomes obvious to anyone who would just look, that they consider us a nuisance and a problem. Their attitude appears to be that of “What’s your problem? I’m giving you stuff…why can’t you understand what’s good for you?”

      But it, and the complicit news agencies fail to address the problem of the Ruling Class acting as elitists. And though Americans are much less likely to have animosity to the rich or the privileged, they do despise it coming from their elected officials. The elected officials, in concert, treat their duties as to the government and the party, not to the people who put them there, as well as a social club that they need to belong to and act appropriately in order to get the better treatment while in office.

      No one, as yet, has interviewed those representatives who were voted out of office and what their opinion is. I suspect it’s because they know they would hear a diatribe of hatred to the voters for “doing that to them”. In the end, it all seems like such an expensive sales pitch to put people in office who now have favors to pay back for the money that was fronted to help get them elected.

      To me, it’s always been the more disgusting side of politics. It seems that no elected person is immune when the thumbscrews are applied by the people who “donated” money to help them out. “You OWE us” they say…and given the shallow and weak moral fiber of the elected person, it’s easy to see how they would acquiesce. It’s wrong…but they do.

    • proreason says:

      Might I suggest that the hundreds of millions to be raked in from big business pale in comparison to the billions to be raked in from the Saudis, Russian, Iranians, and chicoms.

      If you examine every single “progressive” positition, you will discover that every one of them, at the heart, is designed to undermine and destroy this country, which leaves……well, you fill in the blanks.


« Front Page | To Top
« | »