The U.S. must pass a new law stating that...

[Dancing Fire]

In order for the newborn to become an instant American citizen at least one of the parent must be a U.S. citizen. The new law will put them out of business.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/03/03/feds-crack-down-on-chinese-birth-tourism-scam/

 

[madelise]

Yes. They should. There are so many of these birthing houses in my city and surrounding cities. I will go out to eat and find myself looking at large groups of VERY pregnant, about-to-pop women being "chaperoned".

 

[AGBF]

The United States has a long tradition of granting citizenship to people born here. I, for one, am extremely reluctant to change that. I find the idea of changing it very upsetting and, well, un-American.

As some of you know I have been teaching a class, pro bono, in American citizenship and I find that I am really quite emotionally bound to a lot of American traditions. Last Saturday we discussed the legend of George Washington and the cherry tree and the American values it represented. It became so popular because George Washington, although he was an important general and the first president, was flawed, not like a king who was above everyone else.

In the story, he did something wrong, but his father forgave him. That was very American. America did not have debtors' prisons as England had had. People were not punished in a way that left them no way out the way debtors' prison did to its inmates. There was a ban against cruel and unusual punishment. People were allowed to have a fresh start here.

I treasure many of our country's old ways...although not all of them.

Deb/AGBF

 

[Jambalaya]

On the topic of citizenship, I wonder why people who aren't born in the US, but become citizens, aren't allowed to become president. That doesn't seem fair - it's like a two-tiered citizenship, one for people born here and a lesser version for those who are born elsewhere and then become citizens. I can't see any reason for someone to be good enough to be a citizen and yet not good enough to be president. Seems to go against American ideals of equality. I was wondering about this when Arnie S. went into politics.

 

[momhappy]

The United States has a long tradition of granting citizenship to people born here. I, for one, am extremely reluctant to change that. I find the idea of changing it very upsetting and, well, un-American.

As some of you know I have been teaching a class, pro bono, in American citizenship and I find that I am really quite emotionally bound to a lot of American traditions. Last Saturday we discussed the legend of George Washington and the cherry tree and the American values it represented. It became so popular because George Washington, although he was an important general and the first president, was flawed, not like a king who was above everyone else.

In the story, he did something wrong, but his father forgave him. That was very American. America did not have debtors' prisons as England had had. People were not punished in a way that left them no way out the way debtors' prison did to its inmates. There was a ban against cruel and unusual punishment. People were allowed to have a fresh start here.

I treasure many of our country's old ways...although not all of them.

Deb/AGBF

I am not reluctant to see changes made and I find the fact that these women participate in these birthing houses (by intentionally lying, etc.) far more upsetting.

 

[movie zombie]

like Deb i'm very reluctant to see it changed.

 

[packrat]

I'm on board for changes. It seems to me any more it's American to be a doormat.

 

[AGBF]

On the topic of citizenship, I wonder why people who aren't born in the US, but become citizens, aren't allowed to become president. That doesn't seem fair - it's like a two-tiered citizenship, one for people born here and a lesser version for those who are born elsewhere and then become citizens. I can't see any reason for someone to be good enough to be a citizen and yet not good enough to be president. Seems to go against American ideals of equality. I was wondering about this when Arnie S. went into politics.

That rule goes back to when the Founding Fathers wrote the original documents upon which The United States was founded. (I know that many Pricescope members do not live in the United States, so I am resisting the ethnocentric urge to write "upon which this country was founded"!)

The Founding Fathers were wary of men, and was only men who could vote and hold office, of course, who were born in Great Britain. They feared that men who had been born in Great Britain might harbor some allegiance to it or to the king or queen. They had just been through a very traumatic war that was brother against brother-just as The Civil War was to be; the "new world" had been divided with some colonists living in Canada and being loyal to Great Britain while others lived in the fledgling US and had turned their backs on Great Britain. The Founding Fathers were worried about treason and betrayal. One way in which they felt they could guard against it was by demanding that the president be born in the United States, not in Great Britain, so that he would have no feelings of loyalty to "the old country". The prohibition against foreign birth was not meant o discriminate against anyone so much as to protect the US against disloyalty.

AGBF

 

[momhappy]

^^Yes, exactly, packrat.

 

[Dancing Fire]

The United States has a long tradition of granting citizenship to people born here. I, for one, am extremely reluctant to change that. I find the idea of changing it very upsetting and, well, un-American.

Deb/AGBF

Deb
But, in many cases we are too American and people just take advantage of the law.When I turned 18 I had to apply for citizenship b/c neither one of my parent were US citizen at the time. I don't know how hard is the oral interview nowadays, but the immigration officer asked me like 25 Qs about U.S. history...

 

[Jambalaya]

On the topic of citizenship, I wonder why people who aren't born in the US, but become citizens, aren't allowed to become president. That doesn't seem fair - it's like a two-tiered citizenship, one for people born here and a lesser version for those who are born elsewhere and then become citizens. I can't see any reason for someone to be good enough to be a citizen and yet not good enough to be president. Seems to go against American ideals of equality. I was wondering about this when Arnie S. went into politics.

That rule goes back to when the Founding Fathers wrote the original documents upon which The United States was founded. (I know that many Pricescope members do not live in the United States, so I am resisting the ethnocentric urge to write "upon which this country was founded"!)

The Founding Fathers were wary of men, and was only men who could vote and hold office, of course, who were born in Great Britain. They feared that men who had been born in Great Britain might harbor some allegiance to it or to the king or queen. They had just been through a very traumatic war that was brother against brother-just as The Civil War was to be; the "new world" had been divided with some colonists living in Canada and being loyal to Great Britain while others lived in the fledgling US and had turned their backs on Great Britain. The Founding Fathers were worried about treason and betrayal. One way in which they felt they could guard against it was by demanding that the president be born in the United States, not in Great Britain, so that he would have no feelings of loyalty to "the old country". The prohibition against foreign birth was not meant o discriminate against anyone so much as to protect the US against disloyalty.

AGBF

Interesting; thanks.

 

[AGBF]

The United States has a long tradition of granting citizenship to people born here. I, for one, am extremely reluctant to change that. I find the idea of changing it very upsetting and, well, un-American.

Deb
But, in many cases we are too American and people just take advantage of the law.When I turned 18 I had to apply for citizenship b/c neither one of my parent were US citizen at the time. I don't know how hard is the oral interview nowadays, but the immigration officer asked me like 25 Qs about U.S. history...

It was extremely easy when my husband took the test some 35 years ago, too, Dancing Fire. It is extremely hard nowadays. Extremely. Not only are the questions hard, but the interview and what the candidate must write when he hears spoken English is hard. It is also expensive. It costs $700.00 to take the test. If the candidate fails, he is given one more try after a waiting period. If he fails again he must re-apply and go through the entire process.

I began to teach in November with an attorney who, by coincidence, had had a son in school with my daughter throughout elementary school. She told me that she took the 100 question test herself before she began to teach the course and did extremely poorly. She is a very bright woman, I assure you, and well travelled. She has been everywhere on the map. Whenever we talked about a country in class-or, indeed, some national park or monument in the United States-she had been there!

I never thought I would be saying this to you, Dancing Fire, but how can one be "too American"? (Please don't tell me I have started to wave the American flag!)

Deb

 

[Jambalaya]

Regarding people who engage in birth tourism, their lives in their own countries must be very hard to make them undertake such a thing. I always feel that "there by the Grace of God go I." If I were born in a place without the freedom and equal opportunity of the developed world, I would probably try to better my descendants' lives, too. I could easily have been born in Afghanistan and be under the rule of the Taliban, or in impoverished parts of Africa without enough to eat or clean water, or perhaps Saudi and be denied things such as driving, and shopping without my husband's permission. I'd probably try to get out, too. It's pure accident of birth that I was born in the developed world, and I feel sorry for those whose lives are so much harder than mine. Who can blame them for wanting what we have and for using a perfectly legal means of getting it? There is no law against a foreign national giving birth in the United States, and it's the US government who then confers all the rights. If they're not happy about it, then stop conferring! I know that's what the government is thinking of doing, but while it's still legal, I can't blame people for wanting better lives for themselves, and for doing so legally. I would do exactly the same in their shoes. Good for them. Especially considering that many people who come here from elsewhere work extremely hard, often doing jobs that middle-class natural-born Americans don't want to do.

 

[amc80]

I am not reluctant to see changes made and I find the fact that these women participate in these birthing houses (by intentionally lying, etc.) far more upsetting.

Agreed.

 

[Gypsy]

like Deb i'm very reluctant to see it changed.

Me too.

 

[isaku5]

Like you, but from a Canadian perspective, I approve of the original rules for both countries.

Our dear DIL is a proud British Empire Citizen having been born and raised until the age of seven in Scotland. Now, citizens from countries other than Canada have to jump through all kinds of hoops to travel outside the country. Of course, and I agree, she's opposing my efforts to convert her to a dual citizenship.

I have not 'pulled rank' on her because she and I have a lovely relationship and I love her; however, our daughter, granddaughter and I (MIL) have offered to help her in any way possible including taking 'the courses' with her. She refuses based on 'the feeling in her heart'. So be it.

I really don't want to intrude on their relationship any more, but I still wonder what it would take to change her mind.

Hers was a family of two adults and four children when they came to Canada. Her Mom & Dad, the older sister and the older brother took citizenship courses and successfully completed the tests. Now, it's just her younger brother and her who are reluctant to follow.

Our dear son loves the tropics (in the winter) and has completed all the scuba training and certification he needs to scuba dive anywhere in the world.

Any advice would be appreciated.

 

[Maria D]

Regarding people who engage in birth tourism, their lives in their own countries must be very hard to make them undertake such a thing. I always feel that "there by the Grace of God go I." If I were born in a place without the freedom and equal opportunity of the developed world, I would probably try to better my descendants' lives, too. I could easily have been born in Afghanistan and be under the rule of the Taliban, or in impoverished parts of Africa without enough to eat or clean water, or perhaps Saudi and be denied things such as driving, and shopping without my husband's permission. I'd probably try to get out, too. It's pure accident of birth that I was born in the developed world, and I feel sorry for those whose lives are so much harder than mine. Who can blame them for wanting what we have and for using a perfectly legal means of getting it? There is no law against a foreign national giving birth in the United States, and it's the US government who then confers all the rights. If they're not happy about it, then stop conferring! I know that's what the government is thinking of doing, but while it's still legal, I can't blame people for wanting better lives for themselves, and for doing so legally. I would do exactly the same in their shoes. Good for them. Especially considering that many people who come here from elsewhere work extremely hard, often doing jobs that middle-class natural-born Americans don't want to do.

WHERE IS THE LIKE BUTTON??

edit:
OK, now that I've read the article, I'm glad the feds are cracking down on the birthing houses. American citizenship shouldn't be for sale to wealthy foreign nationals.

 

[arkieb1]

In order for the newborn to become an instant American citizen at least one of the parent must be a U.S. citizen. The new law will put them out of business.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/03/03/feds-crack-down-on-chinese-birth-tourism-scam/

It won't put them out of business they will just come to Australia and other countries and do it instead....

 

[movie zombie]

my guess it is already happening in those countries as well........

 

[Gypsy]

I think the solution is to crack down the on the birthing houses. Not allow some bad apples ruin what is a good thing (as Jambalaya so eloquently stated) for other people but changing laws in a reactionary way.

 

[momhappy]

I can sympathize with the fact that people want to better their lives, but that doesn't make their dishonesty, etc. somehow okay. Something needs to be done to discourage these fraudulence acts related to birth tourism and I hope that some changes are made.

 

[Dancing Fire]

The United States has a long tradition of granting citizenship to people born here. I, for one, am extremely reluctant to change that. I find the idea of changing it very upsetting and, well, un-American.

Deb
But, in many cases we are too American and people just take advantage of the law.When I turned 18 I had to apply for citizenship b/c neither one of my parent were US citizen at the time. I don't know how hard is the oral interview nowadays, but the immigration officer asked me like 25 Qs about U.S. history...

It was extremely easy when my husband took the test some 35 years ago, too, Dancing Fire. It is extremely hard nowadays. Extremely. Not only are the questions hard, but the interview and what the candidate must write when he hears spoken English is hard. It is also expensive. It costs $700.00 to take the test. If the candidate fails, he is given one more try after a waiting period. If he fails again he must re-apply and go through the entire process.


I never thought I would be saying this to you, Dancing Fire, but how can one be "too American"? (Please don't tell me I have started to wave the American flag!)

Deb

When I applied for citizenship in 1977 it costed me $40 and the immigration officer asked me a lot of Qs, but when my dad was interviewed the officer only asked him like 5 easy Qs maybe b/c he was in his 60's and officer decided to take it easy on him?

Yeah, they can take it easy on the candidate or make it very tough for the candidate to pass.

 

[packrat]

I kinda think that if we're going to let people come here dishonestly in other ways, we have to let others who want to come here dishonestly the freedom to do so. We can't discriminate. If we don't require one group to follow our rules and laws, then we can't demand others do. Unless they already are citizens. Then they have to follow the laws of course.

 

[Mayk]

I'm on board for changes. It seems to me any more it's American to be a doormat.

+1

 

[autumngems]

Ditto Packrat

 

[AGBF]

I know that this idea is startling, but why don't we welcome immigrants of good character instead of making it hard for them to come here? The United States is supposed to be a melting pot. People used to be kept out (Ellis Island examinations) if they were ill and could give contagious diseases to others, but healthy foreigners were welcomed and allowed to assimilate.

There is a plaque with this quotation from Emma Lazarus' sonnet on the Statue of Liberty:

“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.”

AGBF

 

[packrat]

I would welcome people of great character from anywhere. The problem is, the ones who seem to want to come here in the manner that they do are not the ones that I would consider as having "great character". Strikes me more as the get the free benefits and cater to me type of character. And ehhh it's too hard so I'll just bypass having to actually show that I WANT to be here, I'll force my way in regardless. That's like ehhhh it's too hard to be a dr so you just MAKE me one.

And if you're coming from a crappy place that you don't want to be? Please don't then come here and try to make this country the same way as the one you just ran away from. If you can work THAT hard to change the way our country is, maybe you should use those powers in the country you're from to make it better.

Or work to make OUR country, your new HOME, better. That's a crazy idea I know.

 

[amc80]

I would welcome people of great character from anywhere. The problem is, the ones who seem to want to come here in the manner that they do are not the ones that I would consider as having "great character". Strikes me more as the get the free benefits and cater to me type of character. And ehhh it's too hard so I'll just bypass having to actually show that I WANT to be here, I'll force my way in regardless. That's like ehhhh it's too hard to be a dr so you just MAKE me one. And if you're coming from a crappy place that you don't want to be? Please don't then come here and try to make this country the same way as the one you just ran away from. If you can work THAT hard to change the way our country is, maybe you should use those powers in the country you're from to make it better. Or work to make OUR country, your new HOME, better. That's a crazy idea I know.

PS needs a like button.

 

[AGBF]

I would welcome people of great character from anywhere. The problem is, the ones who seem to want to come here in the manner that they do are not the ones that I would consider as having "great character".

I know that it is not statistically significant, but since I have been teaching a citizenship class I have met a number of people whom I consider to have sterling characters. All of them have wanted very much to become United States citizens and all of them have worked very hard on a difficult curriculum in an attempt to master it. I have seen many of them go from being totally unable to pronounce a date like "1776" to being able to master all dates they see written in a paragraph. I have had a grown man stay after class to clean my blackboard for me out of gratitude. (Well, it was a whiteboard.) I have seen them moved as they practice saying, "The Pledge of Allegiance". And they have to fork over $700.00 to take a test they may not pass. Some of them are older than I am! They are my heroes!!!

Deb

 

[Dancing Fire]

I know that this idea is startling, but why don't we welcome immigrants of good character instead of making it hard for them to come here? The United States is supposed to be a melting pot. People used to be kept out (Ellis Island examinations) if they were ill and could give contagious diseases to others, but healthy foreigners were welcomed and allowed to assimilate.

There is a plaque with this quotation from Emma Lazarus' sonnet on the Statue of Liberty:

“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.”

AGBF

Deb
it is not hard to immigrate to the U.S., people had been doing it for many years. My family and I immigrated to the U.S. in 1966 legally.