Thread: CA. Initiative to target illegal immigrants, their children

The latest on California politics and government

April 10, 2009

CA. Initiative to target illegal immigrants, their children

A group of conservative activists are hoping to bring the issue of illegal immigration back to the front-burner of California politics with a new ballot measure that would create a new caste of birth certificates for children of illegal immigrants and require undocumented parents to be photographed, fingerprinted and pay an additional $75 fee.

A first version of the measure was cleared for circulation on Friday, but Ted Hilton, one of the measure's authors, said in a brief phone interview that the proponents planned to "to do some changes and then re-file" the measure.

He hung up before sharing what parts of the measure would be changed. Former Republican state Sen. Bill Morrow, another author of the measure, could not be immediately be reached for comment.

Proponents call the measure the California Taxpayer Protection Act 2010. They have a here, is aimed for the June 2010 ballot, according to the Web site.

Once a final version is cleared for signature gathering, they must collect 433,971 valid signatures from registered voters in 150 days to qualify for the ballot.

"This is going to be a tremendous grassroots effort," said Hilton.

Few ballot measures in California qualify without funded signature-gathering campaigns and proponents have already created a fundraising account, which spent nearly $200,000 in 2008. Funds were raised mostly in small increments.

Attorney General Jerry Brown has given the first draft of the measure its official title and summary:

DENIAL OF PUBLIC BENEFITS FOR PERSONS WHO CANNOT VERIFY LAWFUL PRESENCE. DENIAL OF BIRTH CERTIFICATES TO CHILDREN OF UNDOCUMENTED PARENTS WHO FAIL TO VERIFY STATUS. INITIATIVE STATUTE. Requires applicants for state, local, and state-administered federal aid to verify lawful presence in United States. Requires applications for public benefits submitted by undocumented parents on behalf of their lawful-resident children to be given to federal authorities. Denies birth certificates to children born to undocumented parents unless mother provides fingerprint and other information to be given to federal authorities. Limits benefits for children in child-only CalWORKS cases to federal minimum. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local government: If upheld in the courts, unknown potential one-time and ongoing costs to state and local governments due to changes in the application process for public benefits as well as changes in the way birth certificates are issued. These costs would be partly offset by additional new fees for certain birth certificates.

Unknown, but probably minor, state and local law enforcement costs due to provisions in the measure creating new crimes, such as for the filing of false affidavits to obtain public benefits. If upheld in the courts, state savings of over $1 billion annually from prohibiting child-only CalWORKs cases, partially offset by state and county costs for children who shifted to Foster Care or county general assistance programs. Further unknown savings from the provisions changing the application processes for public benefits. (09-0004.)

http://www.sacbee.com/static/weblogs/ca ... est%20News

RELATED

CALIFORNIA PROP 187 rises from the dead

http://www.alipac.us/ftopicp-881282.html#881282

TAXPAYER REVOLUTION is launching a June 2010 ballot initiative to protect California's taxpayers from the government's failure to enforce federal laws and the original intent of the 14th Amendment that have caused an expensive "birth tourism" problem.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR
As a graduate student Ted Hilton became a scholar of Constitutional Law, and over the last 17 years has researched the 14th Amendment's original intent, the debates written in the Congressional Globe, along with the study of numerous United States Supreme Court citizenship and jurisdiction cases.

One of his degrees is in Mexican-American Studies. He has studied, taught, and written about this population beginning in the 1970's. Ted has lived and studied in Chile and visited extensively throughout Latin America.

On May 4, 1991, at the border, Ted Hilton held the world’s first press conference on biometric identification for one of its creators, George Warfel, who had recently testified before Congress. Mr. Warfel unveiled the ID as a tool to stop illegal immigration.

September 1991, Ted Hilton attended with an official County of San Diego delegation to meet with representatives and lobby in Washington, D.C. for immigrant impact funds due San Diego County from the 1986 amnesty. At the HUD office under Jack Kemp a representative stated illegal aliens are permitted in public housing.

His background includes holding the first daytime demonstrations along the border and in various communities around San Diego County beginning in 1990, demonstrating to worldwide media the lack of border fencing, and illegal migrant camps with fires in public parks and on private property. In 1991, Ted spoke in person to Leslie Stahl from 60 Minutes asking her to do a segment on the out of control border, but she did not see that as a major problem or future story.

Ted Hilton is the original author and first to submit the legislation to the state’s Legislative Counsel in 1992 for issuance of the California driver’s licenses to only citizens and lawfully residing residents. SB 976 was written from this text. His proposed initiatives from the early 1990's were later sent to Rep. Sensenbrenner who was crafting the federal Real ID Act of 2005, in which several of the provisions are now included.

Ted Hilton has authored several commentary op-eds; a ground-breaking call to end public school education to illegal aliens in the Sacramento Bee, February, 1992.

On March 4, 1994, Ted Hilton's article on the 14th Amendment was published in The Daily Journal, the legal newspaper for Los Angeles County. The newspaper stated it would research the article for accuracy before printing, and the editors entitled it "Unconstitutional Citizenship." The article revealed the truth about the original intent of the subject to the jurisdiction clause and called on the state to stop registering births to those here unlawfully.

In 1995, the Los Angeles Times printed his article on how to improve identification to stop services to illegal migrants, prevent welfare fraud, and deter criminals.

He has worked closely on the text with the state's attorneys and others in Washington, D.C. to create the latest version of the initiative that is now launched for the June, 2010 ballot.

http://www.taxpayerrevolution.org/index ... &Itemid=14

Great bill, and they better write this legislation correctly so no court has any footing to overturn it.

Originally Posted by vortex

Great bill, and they better write this legislation correctly so no court has any footing to overturn it. :D

That can't be done. Any federal judge can decide that anything is unconstitutional and you have to be able to afford to go to the Supreme Court to prove that it isn't unconstitutional.

RELATED

CALIFORNIA TAXPAYER PROTECTION ACT
Sponsored by Taxpayer Revolution

The Initiative’s Laws Will:

REQUIRE issuance of the official "CALIFORNIA BIRTH CERTIFICATE" for births to ONLY citizens and legal permanent residents. Birth to Foreign Parent document issued to all others.

Dec. 31, 2008

http://www.alipac.us/ftopict-141769-cal ... ection+act

I need this drawn out for me. LOL Does thant mean that we will have no more anchor babies in Ca.

THEY LEAVE THIS PART OUT OF EVERY ARTICLE

Endorsements for the Initiative

Patriot, Congressman Dana Rohrabacher (R) Huntington Beach

Patriot, Congressman Brian Bilbray (R) Rancho Santa Fe, current
Immigration Reform Caucus Chairman

Patriot, California State Senator Tom Harman, (R) Huntington Beach

Patriot, Ward Connerly, proponent anti-affirmative action initiatives

Patriot, State Senator Bill Morrow, retired

Patriot, State Senator Larry Sterling, retired

The campaign is proud to announce that we have formal support from the American Legion, Department of California, which has over 150,000 dedicated, patriotic members. We will be able to have petitions at all of the posts and mail to the membership. They are also associated with the auxiliary which has 100,000 members who are the spouses, daughters and sons of American Legion members.

You Don't Speak For Me, Al Rodriguez

Veterans For Secure Borders

NUMBERS USA has made a commitment to direct their over 75,000 California members to the website to support the initiative campaign and download the petition.

TEAM AMERICA PAC, Founded by Congressman Tom Tancredo

California Coalition for Immigration Reform (CCIR)

American Immigration Control Foundation, John Vinson

Phyllis Nemeth has personally endorsed, State Director of Concerned Women of America of California.

American Independent Party former Chairman Ed Noonan issued a statement with a pledge to gather signatures among their over 300,000 members for this initiative.

Pete Nunez, former Assistant Secretary of the U.S. Treasury
Tony Dolz, 30th District congressional candidate
Californians for Population Stabilization

The campaign is currently working for support of California Republican Party groups, elected officials, and other grass roots organizations. State Senator Harman is working on support from other state representatives.

http://www.taxpayerrevolution.org/index ... e&Itemid=1

http://www.taxpayerrevolution.org/index ... ntent&id=4

Originally Posted by agrneydgrl

I need this drawn out for me. LOL Does thant mean that we will have no more anchor babies in Ca.

If it passes and is upheld by the court there would be no NEW anchor babies. All existing anchor babies would still have their citizenship.

Originally Posted by JohnDoe2

If it passes and is upheld by the court there would be no NEW anchor babies. All existing anchor babies would still have their citizenship. [/b]

Yes, but if it passes and is upheld it would also make it possible to attach CONDITIONS to existing anchor babies citizenship, for example they would not be considered full US citizens until they reach age 18 and swear sole allegiance to the USA - in English.