It has become a popular question among reporters in recent weeks, as if it's some sort of "gotcha" question, what presidential candidates would do about U.S.-born children of illegal aliens if their parents are forced to go back home.
According to the Associated Press, reporters demanded that answer of Sen. Fred Thompson today in Iowa. NBC's Tim Russert posed the same question to Mitt Romney on "Meet the Press" this weekend.
In each case, the candidates gave the obvious answer — it's up to the parents.
I just don't get why this is complicated. To me, this seems about the same as any U.S.-born parent who is planning on taking a job overseas and has to decide what to do about his or her children.
Usually, the parents will take the children with them. Sometimes they might make other arrangements, leaving them with a relative or friend, particularly if they are older.
There's no doubt the children of parents who are caught in raids do end up in a difficult situation, particularly in the immediate aftermath of a raid. Some Hispanic-rights groups say that alone is a reason to halt immigration raids. Those who want a crackdown say U.S. laws shouldn't be held hostage to bad parenting choices.
— Stephen Dinan, national political reporter, The Washington Times
Comments (6)
Seems an obvious enough answer to me. Can the good guys on this issue -- Thompson and Romney -- read this blog and get this answer out there into the debate. It's the most obvious point in the world. Left-wing groups have obviously focus-grouped this charge about "disrupting families." Perhaps conservatives ought to focus-group this response.
Posted by D. | December 21, 2007 10:53 AM
Here's where the rubber hits the road; either we are or we aren't pro-family. There is no comparison between someone taking an overseas job and someone being deported and their choices regarding care for the kids. It's simple folks, our immigration entry process is screwed-up. We aren't admitting the numbers of immigrants that we need for our growing economy & that's not the immigrants fault. We are faced with another instance of the feds not doing their jobs. Having said that, we need to enforce our borders and start the employment verification process that was promised as part of the '86 amnesty plan. But we need to accept responsibily for our mistakes even if it means some form of amnesty; then we can start with a clean slate. It's the right & fair thing to do.
Posted by Martin | December 21, 2007 12:44 PM
The root of the problem is birthright citizenship which should be rescinded as it was in Canada. It's all too common to find illegal immigrant women in their 3rd trimester crossing the border to plant their "anchor baby" on American soil.
This is an obsolete law that was meant to safeguard the citizenship rights of the children of slaves and we should have the good sense that Canada showed in aboloshing it. So far, I believe only Ron Paul, among the candidates has called for this.
Posted by politwriter | December 23, 2007 12:19 PM
The discussion of abolishing the birthright citizenship clause is valid. However, I strongly oppose the term 'anchor baby' it's a de-humanizing term meant to make these individuals seem somehow less than other citizens. There are no second class American citizens. These people received their citizenship the same way the majority of Americans did - by birth. Let's treat our fellow citizens with respect and refrain from using this term to describe them.
Posted by Martin | December 29, 2007 6:03 PM
Family values? Does this mean that any criminal shouldn't be sent to prison because it breaks up the family? Kind of a weak argument. Decrying the term "anchor baby" because it is "de-humanizing"? It's describing a tactic, not the baby. A person that marries a forign national for the sole purpose of assisting them obtain citizenship is also a tactic. Demeaning to married people?
Posted by Tom Haley | January 8, 2008 7:53 PM
There is one group of people we never seem to mention, that is the poor American citizen. We should be more concerned for our own, not all these millions being pushed a cross our southern border. These people are not all here,just to work.They break many laws they want special favors and yes they want to be citizens even though they have not earned it. I think they are more like parasites on the back of the American tax payer.Draining the tax payers coffers while saying "we do jobs Americans won't do".That statment is a huge insult to anyone in this country who works for a living
Posted by tony | January 14, 2008 1:38 PM