Thread: Vitter quotes '93 Reid Senate speech on ending birthright citizenship

By Sean Higgins | March 13, 2015 | 12:23 pm



Sen. David Vitter gave a speech on the Senate floor calling on Congress to end the practice of birthright citizenship, arguing that "no sane country" would allow it for the children of illegal immigrants.

Vitter ended the remarks Thursday by saying he was actually quoting an old speech by Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., who now opposes ending birthright citizenship. Reid had slammed Vitter over the issue the previous day.

"This is not my statement. Let me clarify: This is Sen. Harry Reid's statement on the floor of the U.S. Senate," said the Louisiana Republican, who is sponsoring an anti-birthright amendment to a human trafficking bill currently before the Senate. Vitter ended by saying, "Let me just thank Senator Reid for his prior words in strong support of what he yesterday called 'Vitter's stupid amendment.'"

In the early 1990s, Reid was a strong advocate of ending birthright citizenship. In 1993, he introduced the Immigration Stabilization Act, legislation that would have, among other features, denied citizenship to children whose parents were not legally in the U.S. He pushed for the idea again in 1994, writing an op-ed on it for the Los Angeles Times.

In the 1993 speech Vitter quoted, Reid said, "If making it easy to be an illegal alien is not enough, how about offering a reward for being an illegal immigrant? No sane country would do that, right? Guess again. If you break our laws by entering this country without permission and give birth to a child, we reward that child with U.S. citizenship and guarantee full access to all public and social services this society provides. And that is a lot of services. Is it any wonder that two-thirds of the babies born at taxpayer expense in county-run hospitals in Los Angeles are born to illegal alien mothers?"

The senator backed away from the position a few years later. He told the Las Vegas Review-Journal in 1999 that he was wrong to have called for repeal. "I didn't understand the issue. I'm embarrassed that I made such a proposal."

A Reid staffer forwarded excerpts from a 2006 speech in which the senator called it the "biggest mistake I ever made" and said that atoning for that past mistake was partly why he now advocates for a major overhaul.

This is not the first time that Reid's past support of anti-immigration legislation has been used by his opponents to call him a hypocrite. His 2010 Republican opponent, Sharon Angle, raised it in their Senate race. In an analysis the same year, the Tampa Bay Times' Politifact group rated Reid's stance on birthright citizenship a "full flipflop."

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/vi...rticle/2561481

In the early 1990s, Reid was a strong advocate of ending birthright citizenship. In 1993, he introduced the Immigration Stabilization Act, legislation that would have, among other features, denied citizenship to children whose parents were not legally in the U.S. He pushed for the idea again in 1994, writing an op-ed on it for the Los Angeles Times.

That was before the Cartels got to him.

Originally Posted by Jean

In the early 1990s, Reid was a strong advocate of ending birthright citizenship. In 1993, he introduced the Immigration Stabilization Act, legislation that would have, among other features, denied citizenship to children whose parents were not legally in the U.S. He pushed for the idea again in 1994, writing an op-ed on it for the Los Angeles Times.

In the 1993 speech Vitter quoted, Reid said, "If making it easy to be an illegal alien is not enough, how about offering a reward for being an illegal immigrant? No sane country would do that, right? Guess again. If you break our laws by entering this country without permission and give birth to a child, we reward that child with U.S. citizenship and guarantee full access to all public and social services this society provides. And that is a lot of services. Is it any wonder that two-thirds of the babies born at taxpayer expense in county-run hospitals in Los Angeles are born to illegal alien mothers?"

I wonder if Reid can even remember the last time that he told the truth under duress.

Vitter's amendment is admirable, but not absolutely necessary. The Reconstruction Amendments - the 13th, 14th, and 15th - were intended to prevent former slave states from imposing de facto slavery on liberated black Americans. The author of the 15th Amendment was particularly clear in stating that the 14th did not apply to foreigners, children of diplomats, or people in the United States temporarily.

The crucial clause is, "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof". We can apply our laws to foreigners. For example, if tourists are convicted of shoplifting, we can imprison them and then deport them. But doing that does not transform them into people who are subject to United States jurisdiction, in the sense that that term was meant by the 14th Amendment's authors.

Reading the debates which lead up to the Amendments being published would make the 14th Amendment's meaning abundantly clear.
***********************************
Americans first in this magnificent country

American jobs for American workers

Fair trade, not free trade

I wonder if Reid can even remember the last time that he told the truth under duress.

It was right before he took his first payola from the Cartels.