Thread: My Response to Anti-HR1940 Representative

I received an e-mail response from the representative of my Congressional District today, detailing his reasons for not wanting to support HR 1940. I am listing below his reasons and I am following with my response which I have also copied to our Governor's office. I am sending this to you so that others may have an idea about how to send an appropriate response to your Congressional representatives who fail to see the wisdom of this important House Resolution. If it helps, in responding to your representatives who do not support HR 1940, feel free to use any portion of my response, but edit it of course, to substitute the name of my Congressional Representative with the name of your own Congressional Representative, and substitute "California" with the name of your state. If you wish, send a copy of your response to the Governor of your state as well.

Here are California Representative Howard Berman’s reasons for refusing to support HR 1940:

“Thank you for expressing your support for the Citizenship Reform Act of 2007, H.R 133.

“The guarantee of citizenship to anyone born within the United States, other than children of ambassadors and foreign enemies, is embodied within the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and that right has been reaffirmed by the Supreme Court. This Act would change this meaning of the Constitution to deny citizenship to children born in the United States, unless their parents are lawful permanent residents or U.S. citizens.

“Revoking birthright citizenship threatens our core constitutional values. This legislation has been proposed for several Congresses and both the Department of Justice and outside legal experts have testified that it is unconstitutional.

“I know that many who support eliminating birth right citizenship are concerned about children born to illegal parents conferring immigrant status to their parents, but a child's U.S. citizenship does not insulate their parents from deportation or other punishment. Undocumented parents must wait until their American-born offspring turn twenty-one before they can begin the legalization process, and most face an additional ten-year penalty for entering the country illegally. We should not amend the Constitution because of the current failure of our immigration laws. We should focus on fixing the immigration system itself.

“For these reasons, I do not support the elimination of birthright citizenship.â€

Very well written ....and factual response!
Thanks for sharing

Great op-ed piece. Thanks for putting this out to us all to use. As soon as we wrap up the defeat of the DREAM Act, many of us can jump on this.

Doesn't want to amend the Consitiution? What a load of bull crap. They were going to amend it and change our laws to legalize 20 million illegals. Oh, but I forgot. We don't get the same priveleges as illegals. What was I thinking. Silly me.

MarkM

Great response!!!
Thank you so much for posting it.

What you need to say is birthright citizenship for illegal aliens discriminates based on origin, since 90% of them are Latin American. I have found saying "it's discrimination" gives most liberal Democrats brain freeze. It's a very effective weapon against their warped minds.

If he believes HR1940 is unconstitutional, then to stop this discrimination he should co-sponsor Ron Paul's proposed amendment.