Antibob, you and I are in agreement, wrt post 37
- Questionable political self-identification: check.
So will you vote Republican or stay home?
We can and do do that already. Of course if the kid stays then we’ll end up spending even more taxpayer money on foster care while destroying a family unit in the process; if we send the kid back with them we’ve effectively deported an American citizen and denied him the right to grow up in his home country. And AFAIK once you’ve been deported for being an illegal alien it’s pretty much impossible to ever enter the US legally again even if you have family connections. Somebody please correct me if I’m wrong.
The way you are pushing this constitutional aspect causes me to wonder about your credentials. Frankly, you sound like a pro-illegal propagandist who just wants to keep that $113 Billion a year flowing in your direction.
The United States Senate is scheduled to hold hearings on the issue of anchor babies and the 14th Amendment. There has been discussion of add the phrase, “as long as both parents are legal citizens of the United States.” Some say that is not necessary. The use of fake citizenship documents is a felony and grounds for faster deportation than questioning citizenship. I am sure that you can see in this economy blaming illegal immigrants is the easy out, and your attitude helps recruit more bigots.
Look, other than my liberal philosophy, I do not have a horse in this race. None of what happens will effect me personally. I am involved in a review of my liberal politics on this issue. I read every article I can find.
I believe the illegal immigration issue, especially U. S. citizenship is where American - Democrats and Republicans - are going to draw the line. I sympathize with the problems of illegal immigration. I am taking a hard look at the issue. But, I have to tell you legal American citizens win over undocumented immigrants every time. And, your tone is locking in that view as I type.
This is why President Obama is ignoring the liberal base in the party, and working with the moderates. He knows we have no other viable candidate to compete with him. We liberals need to get on the same page with the rest of the nation. Today that page is BUDGET TALKS.
I did not create this link, http://www.fairus.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=16980&security=1601&news_iv_ctrl=1017, and I have not monitored their methodology. The $113 Billion per year figure may be low for health care, education, and welfare of illegal aliens and their anchor babies. FAIr is the most frequently quoted source of information.
You need to check your sources illegal aliens are clearly a drain on the economy, and illegal aliens and their anchor babies are unpopular with mainstream America. If you have** links** as to taxes and Social Security they pay, I would be interested to see them. I try to base my opinions on facts and there are always new perspectives coming out.
You’ve been told that anchor babies is a loaded term, yet you keep using it.
You’ve been told that Fairus.org is a racist website, yet you keep linking it.
Your “research” on this topic is biased and you dismissed the poll from your earlier identical thread because it didn’t conform to this bias, so there isn’t any point in this thread.
This is the third time I have stated this in this thread that I joined The Straight Dope on the recommendation of someone in another board because I wanted to ask questions about illegal immigration to fellow liberals. So far, I am not impressed.
Looks to me like the real question here is can BrainGlutton actually read a post before he runs his keyboard. 
[quote=“Cyclone, post:44, topic:589650”]
The way you are pushing this constitutional aspect causes me to wonder about your credentials. Frankly, you sound like a pro-illegal propagandist who just wants to keep that $113 Billion a year flowing in your direction[\quote]
well I was born in Alabama to white parents who were born in Alabama in fact my great great great grand father fought in the civil war one of my ancestors was an officer in the revolutionary war I fought in Iraq my uncle was a deputy sheriff in Birmingham from 1961 to 1975 .Still want to compare credentials?
Please provide an alternative term to “anchor babies,” this is the term mainstream media uses.
As to research on the subject, how many fact links have you provided in this thread? It goes to your lack of credibility.
Well, given the choice…
[quote=“Cyclone, post:49, topic:589650”]
Please provide an alternative term to “anchor babies,” this is the term mainstream media uses[\Quote]Citizen.
Not here but I have made the case in the past.
The issue is nuanced though.
They seem to be a net benefit to the federal budget. They can be a net drain to a state though (depending on the state). So, states like California see a substantial net drain due to a significant illegal immigrant population. Other states with few illegal immigrants see a net benefit.
Averaged out across the country and illegal immigrants are a net financial benefit overall. That still does not help a state like California’s budget. They have to bear that cost. The rest of the country benefits.
So far, I do not believe you.
I have, but apparently you haven’t. Care to point out where in the constitution the US declared war on either Britain or the CSA?
Yes, it strains credibility, wot?
He is a liberal in the randian sense in other words he is a teabagger. But then you knew that… But others might not
Mainstream Media? Or Fox News? 
= = =
You are relying for your terminology on the same “mainstream media” that changed “inheritance tax” to “death tax” and invented “death panels” and “ground zero mosque” for artificial things that did not even exist.
The (scare tactic) notion behind “anchor baby” is that a mother dropping a kid on U.S. soil immediately begins to use that child’s citizenship to bring her parents and grandparents and all her cousins and in-laws into the U.S. as “family.” In fact, this does not happen and, as already noted, an illegal immigrant who gives birth to a U.S. citizen based on location of birth is still subject to deportation.
The issue is not what the “mainstream media” calls such a child; the issue is that the whole notion is a propaganda campaign of lies that you perpetuate by continuing to refer to that false phrase.
Illegal immigration is a serious situation, but a genuine discussion regarding ways to deal with it is better engaged without relying on nonsense phrase and scare tactics.
Let’s pretend that all the figures in the OP are true, that they are all illegal immigrants, and that they don’t pay anything into the system.
That’s $118 billion / 307 million = $368 per person per year. Divide by 12. Oh noes, I pay $30 a month to help people so poor that they came to America just to take the crappiest jobs, where they are constantly in fear of being deported back to even worse conditions.
Yeah, I have no problem with any of that. If they are poor enough that they need this much help, then, as American citizens, they would still be poor. And if I’m okay with helping out poor Americans via taxes (hence calling myself a liberal), why in the world would I not also be okay with helping out people from even worse countries?
I stopped reading at “I thought ‘anchor babies’ was the polite term”
I need to check my sources? It’s a source you provided. I just read it to see how badly you were misrepresenting it.
I’m sure that illegal immigrants are putting a huge burden on social services, but I suspect the reason that they are doing so is that employers are delighted to hire employees that don’t get health insurance or benefits or livable wages. So they are effectively shunting the legitimate costs of doing business onto the public sector. So let’s assume that we replace (somehow) all these illegal workers with native born Americans doing the same scut labor for the same pay and benefits. The government will probably still be paying out the same sums because * those * people won’t be able to pay for social services and medical bills.