The first day of media coverage of Donald Trump's new stand against birthright citizenship has mostly included misinformation and faulty analysis. Here are the big facts that need to emerge to clear up the confusion that many in the media (especially on TV) are sowing.
(NOTE: Trump's positions in this blog have been superseded by later comments found in later blogs.) Donald Trump, Scott Walker and Rick Santorum revealed important things about themselves in high-pressure moments this past week, surrounded by the cameras and tape recorders of national media.
Reuters reports GOP presidential candidates Scott Walker and Rick Santorum could make inroads with working-class voters based on their desire to allow fewer to legally immigrate to the United States. Such voters have struggled with stagnant wages and fewer job opportunities since the great recession, which started in 2007.
Former Senator and possible presidential candidate Rick Santorum laid out an immigration policy that he says “prioritizes American’s needs, workers, and families.” It calls for: securing the border and ending the border surge; tracking all entries and exits; making E-Verify mandatory; ending birthright citizenship for aliens; pursuing interior enforcement; reducing legal immigration; and denying further work permits to illegal aliens.
For the first time in 10 years, the issue of Birthright Citizenship was in the forefront on Capitol Hill this week when the House Immigration Subcommittee held a hearing on Wednesday. The hearing sought to determine if Birthright Citizenship is the right policy for America, but it focused less on the policy question, and more on whether or not it's a Constitutional mandate via the 14th Amendment. The panelists told the Subcommittee that only with a law passed by Congress could the courts offer an interpretation.
Breitbart News -- Caroline May
Approximately 350,000 to 400,000 children are born to illegal immigrants in the U.S. each year. Due to current policy, all automatically become U.S. citizens, Center for Immigration Studies legal policy analyst Jon Feere testified before a House panel Wednesday.
The New York Times editorial "Mr. Obama's Moment on Immigration," garnered 458 comments, 322 of which made the "Readers' Picks" list. Of those 322, I counted 25 that supported the editorial's pro-executive-action stance. Of the 25 comments in favor of executive action, 21 were recommended ten times or less. None of the 25 received more than 67 recommendations (and that comment stated, in part, that "The message should be clear that US values legal immigration over illegal entry. If we make laws, we should implement them.").
* 11:30 p.m. -- Democrats very well may have retained control of the Senate if national Party leaders and the White House had not pressured vulnerable Senators like Pryor of Arkansas, Landrieu of Louisiana, Hagan of North Carolina and Begich of Alaska to pass the Senate Gang of Eight's comprehensive amnesty and immigration-doubling bill.
Commentators surely are right to say that House Majority Leader Eric Cantor lost his Primary because voters thought he was out of touch with them and too beholden to big national corporate and financial lobbies, and Prof. Brat successfully used Cantor's immigration efforts to drive home that message. Brat didn't just challenge Cantor's flirting with amnesties but attacked the whole mindset of most in national Republican Party leadership that the nation needs a lot more foreign workers during a time of historic high numbers of Americans who aren't working.
This past weekend, the Orange County Register ran a Q&A with NumbersUSA's Roy Beck. The interview, conducted by staff writer Roxana Kopetman, touched on the ongoing immigration debate in Congress, our recent evangelical poll and the disparity between church leaders and their followers, and the future of immigration policy in the United States.