Poll: No automatic citizenship for those born in U.S.
More than 1,000 readers responded to Register online poll about whether everyone born here should be citizen.
By Cindy Carcamo
The Orange County Register (Santa Ana, CA), September 17, 2009
Nearly three-fourths of ocregister.com readers who responded to an online poll said United States citizenship should not be automatic for everyone born on U.S. soil.
About 1,050 people responded to a poll about birthright citizenship coming to the forefront as both sides of the debate are readying themselves for the possibility of an immigration overhaul.
The question posed was 'Should United States citizenship be automatic for everyone born on U.S. soil.'
As of 11 a.m. today Citizenship Day 73 percent of readers had clicked on 'No. We need to cut off the costly benefits to the children of parents who are in the country illegally.'
As of the same time, 23 percent had voted 'Yes. It would be too burdensome and costly to have everyone prove their citizenship.' Only 4 percent voted they didn't know how to answer.
The poll was in response to an article about several initiatives, including one in California that would impose new rules for birth certificates, essentially calling for the state to issue one type of birth certificate to children of U.S. citizens and green card holders and another to children of temporary residents and of those who are here illegally.
The attempt is aimed at cutting off automatic citizenship for children who were born on United States soil of parents who are in the country illegally.
One of the comments against birthright citizenship was from 'jskdn2' who said:
'Citizenship at birth and for minor children should automatically follow the citizenship status of their parents. It's disingenuous to argue for family unity and support a system that creates legal status in contradiction to that goal.'
Another commenter who supported birthright citizenship came from 'airickoo' who wrote:
'The sad thing is that the majority of these people probably wouldn't be citizens if we didn't have this law in effect because their German, Irish and Italian ancestors' kids wouldn't have become citizens automatically either. There are much better ways of deal with immigration, but changing this law would fundamentally undermine our country's ideology.'
Another commenter said the California initiative would prove ineffective.
'Sounds like Ted Hilton needs to learn about federal laws versus state laws. He needs to realize that no California initiative will change the constitution or over rule the constitution. It's just going to be a waste of time and more California tax money if this initiative takes ground. He really should be focusing on pressuring congress because they are the only ones that can do anything about the 14th and how it is written.'
Supporters of the initiative say the automatic citizenship policy is bankrupting the state. In addition, they said it would save the state billions by cutting off benefits to children who did not qualify for the birth certificate offered to the children of citizens and permanent residents.
Opponents, however, say the initiative fails to address what they said are the impracticalities and costly implications to the government and taxpayers. In addition, they say the initiatives wouldn't stem the flow of people coming to the country illegally. People who come to the country illegally come for jobs and to reunite with family.
In addition, they said the 'anchor baby' idea is a myth because a child born on U.S. soil can't sponsor his or her parents until he or she becomes 21. And, the process is long, and requirements are strict and challenging to overcome, they said.