Consequences of misinterpreting the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution

Fred Elbel.

Website by Fred Elbel, Elbel Consulting Services, LLC


Births to illegal alien mothers are adding more to the U.S. population each year than did immigration from all sources in an average year prior to 1965.

The Urban Institute estimates the cost of educating illegal alien children in the nation’s seven states with the highest concentration of illegal aliens was $3.1 billion in 1993 (which, with the growth of their population to 1.3 million, would be more like $5 billion in 2000). This estimate does not take into account the additional costs of bilingual education or other special educational needs.1

FAIR estimates there are currently between 287,000 and 363,000 children born to illegal aliens each year. This figure is based on the crude birth rate of the total foreign-born population (33 births per 1000) and official estimates of the size of the illegal alien population – between 8.7 and 11 million. It should be noted that the Bear Stearns investment firm and others have concluded that the actual number of illegal aliens in the United States could be as high as 20 million.2,3 Using this higher number would roughly double FAIR’s estimate to approximately 574,000 to 726,000 children born to illegal aliens each year!

As of 2001, the cost of having a baby in the U.S. ranged from $6,000 to $8,000 for a normal delivery and $10,000 to $12,000 for a cesarean birth (to as much as $14,000 in certain parts of the country).10 Assuming that an average birth in the year 2007 now costs $8,000, the total cost for 363,000 anchor babies would be approximately $3 billion. Assuming the more realistic number of 726,000 anchor babies, the total cost would be nearly $6 billion. American taxpayers pay a substantial part of this cost.

In 1994, California paid for 74,987 deliveries to illegal alien mothers, at a total cost of $215.2 million (an average of $2,842 per delivery). Illegal alien mothers accounted for 36 percent of all Medi-Cal funded births in California that year.1 A survey conducted under the auspices of the University of California, found that of new Hispanic mothers in California border hospitals, 15 percent had crossed the border specifically to give birth. Two-thirds of births in Los Angeles County hospitals are to illegal alien mothers who are in the U.S. in violation of our existing immigration laws.

Illegal aliens are not eligible for welfare benefits, but their citizen children qualify for Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) and other benefits granted to US citizens. Based on data collected in California for AFDC’s “children only” cases, the California Department of Social Services estimated that in fiscal 1994-1995, 193,800 children of illegal aliens received welfare, costing $553 million.

By not addressing this abuse of the Fourteenth Amendment and enforcing immigration law, the funds that state and local governments must provide to anchor babies amounts to a virtual tax on U.S. citizens to subsidize illegal aliens.

Rule of Law

By deliberately not addressing this loophole, Congress in effect rewards law-breakers and punishes those who have chosen to follow the rules and immigrate legally.

The 14th Amendment stipulates that Congress has the power to enforce its provisions by enactment of legislation, and the power to enforce a law is necessarily accompanied by the authority to interpret that law. Therefore, an act of Congress stating its interpretation of the 14th Amendment, as not to include the offspring of illegal aliens, would fall within Congress’s prerogative.

One Man, One Vote

Congressional district reapportionment weighted by the presence of illegal alien noncitizens is notably unfair to American citizens (both natural-born and naturalized), and clearly violates the principle of “one man, one vote”.

As the number of US House seats is fixed at 435, reapportionment means that if a given state gains a House district, another state must lose one. If non-citizens (illegal aliens) are counted in the decennial Census upon which districts are apportioned, then states with larger illegal alien populations are likely to end up with more districts and therefore more representation in the House. This effectively dilutes the votes citizens in states having relatively low proportions of illegal aliens.

United States Sovereignty

The Oath of Allegiance for Naturalized Citizens

“I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God.”8

The Mexican government recently provided dual nationality to its citizens who naturalize in the United States. No longer looked upon by their countrymen with contempt, those who emigrate (and sneak in) to the United States are seen by Mexico as advocates for its presumed territorial claims to the American Southwest. Mass immigration, while acting as an overpopulation safety valve for Mexico, simultaneously strengthens Mexico’s political presence inside the United States. Mexican dual nationality serves to retain the allegiance of its citizens who become United States citizens, and to discourage assimilation – in spite of the oath of allegiance they take to America.

Unconstrained illegal immigration and disregard for the rule of law are not conducive toward maintaining US sovereignty. Special corporate and political interests want all the cheap foreign labor they can get. Misinterpreting the 14th Amendment and granting automatic birthright citizenship to children of illegal aliens is but one aspect of the dismantling of America.

In April, 2005, President Bush signed the Security Prosperity Partnership with Canada and Mexico, with the stated objective of ensuring the free movement of goods and people across the US border. This treaty, never ratified by Congress, is a significant step towards the North American Union where a sovereign United States will be merely a memory.

Population and environmental consequences

United States population is at roughly 300 million and is projected to double within the lifetimes of children born today.4 Approximately two-thirds of this population growth will be due to mass immigration – that is, immigrants, illegal aliens, and their descendents.5

The United States is past the point of environmental sustainability. Scientists have noted that a sustainable population at today’s consumption levels would be approximately 100 to 150 million people.6 A good and readable overview of the population-environment connection can be found at SUSPS. A visual presentation of the damage illegal immigration does to the environment near our southern border can be seen at DesertInvasion.US.

Other countries

The United Kingdom, for example, formerly allowed Birthright citizenship. In 1981, because of immigration pressures, they restricted it to now require that one parent be a legal resident. In France birthright citizenship has been changed — now children between the ages of 16 and 22 of illegal alien parents must actively seek French citizenship.

It should be noted that on June 11, 2004 Irish voters voted in a national referendum to end automatic citizenship for any child born in Ireland regardless of the parents’ residence status. Ireland was the last member of the European Union to allow pregnant foreigners to gain residence and welfare benefits as a result of birth in the country. (Seattle Post Intelligencer, June 13, 2004.)

Millions of Americans

Millions of Americans have served in defense of the United States of America. Many have died to preserve the freedoms that we take for granted – freedoms granted to United States citizens by the US Constitution. Granting birthright citizenship to the children of illegal aliens whose first act in coming here is to break our laws, cheapens beyond recognition the meaning of our Constitution and the value of the lives lost fighting to preserve it.

Notes and more information:

1.   Anchor Babies: The Children of Illegal Aliens (Federation for American Immigration Reform)

2.   Robert Justich and Betty Ng, CFA, The Underground Labor Force Is Rising To The Surface (Bear Stearns, January 3, 2005)

3.   Fred Elbel, Illegal immigration invasion numbers (DesertInvasion.US, August, 2004). Published in the Social Contract under the title How Many Illegals Are There in the U.S.? (A New Methodology) (Fall, 2005)

4.   US Census Bureau.

5. resources on Birthright Citizenship

6.   SUSPS

7.   James R. Edwards, Jr., Two Sides of the Same Coin – The Connection Between Legal and Illegal Immigration, (Center for Immigration Studies, February, 2006)

8.   Anthony Beilenson, Case for Correction By Constitutional Amendment, The Social Contract (Fall, 1996)

9.   US Citizenship and Immigration Services

10.   The Cost of Having a Baby Dr. Greenfield (Dr. Spock, July 18, 2001)

Misinterpretation of the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution

Fred Elbel.

Website by Fred Elbel, Elbel Consulting Services, LLC

Quite simply, the Fourteenth Amendment currently is being interpreted to grant automatic birthright citizenship to children born in the United States of illegal alien parents (called anchor babies because under the 1965 immigration Act, they act as an anchor that pulls the illegal alien mother and eventually a host of other relatives into permanent U.S. residency). This clearly is contrary to the original intent of Congress and the States in ratifying the Fourteenth Amendment.

While it has been the practice to bestow citizenship to children of illegal aliens, this has never been ruled on by the Supreme Court.

Professors Peter Schuck and Rogers Smith have noted1 that:

“The present guarantee under American law of automatic birthright citizenship to the children of illegal aliens can operate…as one more incentive to illegal migration and violation by nonimmigrant aliens already here [.] When this attraction is combined with the powerful lure of the expanded entitlements conferred upon citizen children and their families by the modern welfare state, the total incentive effect of birthright citizenship may well become significant.”


1.   Professors Peter Schuck and Rogers Smith, “Consensual Citizenship” (Chronicles, July 1992)

Outrage A Fluke; Hypocrisy Real

Warning: Uncensored Language.

Betty Ann McCaskill, Claire’s Momma, was so outraged at Rush Limbaugh’s verbal abuse of Sandra Fluke that she… …she… …asked for money. “Now he’s made me mad!” said she.  So buck up $5.00 and she’ll rid the world of the Republican War On Women.  Republican War On Women?

You mean Bill Maher, the Democrat voter, who called Sarah Palin a cunt and a dumb twat.  Momma McCaskill, will you forward me your letter of outrage when your favorite Liberal misogynist verbally abused a wildly popular Governor.  Are you going to raise money to stop Bill Maher’s Democrat “war on women”?

Or, how about Ed Schultz, the Democrat voter, who called Laura Ingraham a talk slut?  Please forward me your letter of outrage railing against MSNBC and “his out-of-control nasty mouth”.

Here’s the latest Democrat prostitution of a woman to raise money and fortify their power:

h/t Boone County Republicans

From: Betty Anne McCaskill <>

Date: March 6, 2012 1:12:44 PM CST

To: *

Subject: Who are you calling a “slut” or a “babe”?


Brian —

Don’t Let Republicans Wage War on Women – Click Here to Contribute [link removed]

Now he’s made me mad.

Rush Limbaugh has never been someone I paid much attention to. But you can’t call my daughter, or any woman, that!

When Rush Limbaugh attacked my daughter and law student Sandra Fluke last week, I saw red. I feel for that young lady’s mother. But I bet she’s proud of her daughter’s willingness to stand up for her rights.

Somebody please send me a link where Rush Limbaugh “attacked my daughter”.  I’ve searched the Interwares and nada example I find.

Can you give $5 to help fight back against Rush and his anti-women assault? [link removed]

I have been working for women’s rights all my life, and brought up my three daughters and a son to believe that every human being deserves respect, dignity, and equality.

And at 83, I can honestly say that I’ve seen real change when it comes to women’s rights. But in the last few weeks it has become obvious that some want to walk back the progress women have made in this country.

Rush Limbaugh and his out-of-control nasty mouth is part of the problem. But it is much bigger than even his mouth.

Please don’t let the Republicans have their

way on this. Don’t let them wage war on women.

Show them that we know how to defeat them by making a contribution to Claire’s campaign today. [link removed]

Nothing will bother this old boys club more than a strong independent thinker like Claire being reelected.

I thought after 40 years of progress this wouldn’t be an issue any more. Unfortunately, it seems that I’ve thought too highly of Republican Party leaders.

Please help Claire put these anti-women Republicans in their place with a $5 contribution:

This is an incredibly important moment for women, and we need you on our side.

Thank you for your continued support of my daughter,

Betty Anne McCaskill

Claire, you and your Momma feign outrage; we know it’s just a fluke.  But, your hypocrisy is fully transparent and real.  Of course, I doubt there’s a Conservative within earshot of the Internet that believes that you actually penned that letter.

Clearly the vile Bill Maher, Ed Schultz and The View, supporters of Democrats, represent the views of Missourians, so we should certainly re-elect you to the Senate.

Support The REINS Act

By David Epps, Cape Girardeau, MO [Edited by Brian Bollmann]

An Open Letter To:

  • Senator Roy D. Blunt
  • Senator Claire McCaskill
  • Representative Jo Ann Emerson

I demand you support the REINS Act.

Congress must play the largest role in making rules that govern our country. Unfortunately, the balance of power between the branches has been disturbed and executive agencies distort often decades-old statutes to install presidential policies that Congress never intended and would never approve. This must end.

The EPA, DOE, FDA, FED, HUD and other agencies were formed in the best interests of the people of the United States but they have been turned and used as a weapon against America. Neither you nor I could have ever believed that such a thing could happen, but it has!

A case in point, the EPA:

Take second hand smoke. You cannot point to a lung cancer and say that is a result of the carcinogens in the smoke. All you can say is that there is statistical probability that it may be. But there is a statistical probability that it is from something else.

Or take dust and particulates, it looks dirty so therefore it is dirty and needs regulation. Well no it doesn’t until it is proved beyond a shadow of doubt that it is the cause of direct harm. The head of the EPA said “We would regulate dust if we had the budget”. There is no science in that statement just an expression of a desire of a bureaucrat to perform to their job description, regulate.

Or take SO2 and other emissions from burning coal. It was proved that SO2 produces acid rain so we cleaned it up. Now it has stopped acid rain so what is the necessity of further cleaning. NONE. There is a point of diminishing returns. But yet the EPA is continuing to tighten emissions without proof of harm.

There is a point of diminishing returns! The EPA website proves it!

As of 2010 the US had spent $729 billion total on Air pollution abatement. The EPA claimed that this resulted in 160,000 fewer deaths per year due to reduced adult mortality. By 2020 the US will spend an additional $650 billion total on Air pollution abatement. The EPA claims that this result in an additional 70,000 fewer deaths per year due to reduced adult mortality.

I will decide if it is worth it? It ain’t!!

The total deaths in the US due to all causes in 2007 was 2.4 million.

Certified cause of Deaths US

  • 2,423,712 – All causes
  • 616,067 – Diseases of heart
  • 562,875 – Malignant neoplasms
  • 135,952 – Cerebrovascular diseases
  • 127,924 – Chronic lower respiratory diseases
  • 123,706 – Accidents (unintentional injuries)
  • 74,632 – Alzheimer’s disease
  • 71,382 – Diabetes mellitus
  • 52,717 – Influenza and pneumonia
  • 46,448 – Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome and nephrosis
  • 34,828 – Septicemia
  • 34,598 – Intentional self-harm (suicide)
  • 29,165 – Chronic liver disease and cirrhosis
  • 23,965 – Essential hypertension and hypertensive renal disease14
  • 20,058 – Parkinson’s disease
  • 18,361 – Assault (homicide)
  • 451,034 – All other causes (Residual)

Source CDC

1,186,039 – Fetuses Aborted

The $650 billion could be more wisely spent and have far more efficacy discovering cures for all the other causes of death — well like lung cancer!

And if that is not enough to convince you how out of control the EPA is just look at their website. Its contents are purely political. The EPA claims that we either pay $650 billion for clean the air or pay $2 trillion for poor health? The EPA arrived at this figure by assuming each death is worth about $7.4 million each.  Is death really worth $7.4 million?

The REINS Act would ensure that any regulation with an impact of more than $100 million would be subject to an up-or-down vote in both chambers of Congress and would require a presidential signature before the regulation would become law.

The REINS Act is about transparency, accountability and the proper balance of power between Congress and the president. I urge you to do the job you were elected to do and ensure that no regulations with a major impact on our economy become law unless Congress approves them.

I demand you support the REINS Act and that you and congress get directly involved in regulating the EPA regulators. This statement sounds so bazaar but that is exactly what we get when we put a communist in the White House.


TTTT Takeaway Activism and Notes – October 2010

Takeaway Activism

Do you want to help finance the Barack Obama Re-Election Campaign of 2012?

Do you want your tax dollars to help finance the Barack Obama Re-Election Campaign of 2012?

Of course not

But, if the President gets his way, that’s exactly what you’re going to be doing.  At a joint session of congress, usually reserved for declarations of war and State Of The Union Addresses, Obama introduced his much-touted $447 Billion American Jobs Act – admonishing congress to “Pass This Bill” 17 times during his speech.  You and I know it is nothing more than a political ploy that will be used to beat the Republican Presidential Nominee in 2012.

Last week, the Democrat led Senate failed to pass the bill.  Now, there is talk that the bill will be split up into various parts, and the American Federation of Teachers wants you to support the spending of $35 Billion of your Federal tax dollars to save 280,000 teachers jobs nationwide.

That’s $125,000 per teaching job.  How many of you are making $125,000 per year?

The American Federation of Teachers, the Democrats, and Barack Obama have a plan for you:

  1. They want you to continue to support the invasion by the Federal Government into our local schools with the usual government strings attached.  Do we want that?
  2. They want to control everything from what your kids eat at school to whether or not you’re allowed to read The Bible between classes.  Do we want that?
  3. They want to take more money from your grandkids and great-grandkids to give to teachers now.  Do we want that?
  4. They want to take your tax dollars, funnel it through 280,000 teachers’ union dues, and finance their campaigns with help from their friends the union bosses.  Do we want that?

Of course not

But, guess what, a $35 Billion Schools Bill sounds a lot better than a $447 Billion Jobs bill.  And, it might sound just good enough to Roy Blunt, Claire McCaskill, and Jo Ann Emerson to vote for it.  Heck, they voted for the Korean Free Trade Agreement which, according to the Economic Policy Institute, will cost 159,000 U.S. jobs and will have a net negative $20.7 Billion effect on the U.S. / Korea trade balance.

Each month at our Third Tuesday Tea Time, the CCTP will ask you to Get Active!  We’ll call it Takeaway Activism.

This month we are asking you to contact your Federal Representatives to tell them to VOTE NO on the American Jobs Act and any other incarnation or portion of it.  VOTE NO for spending increases.  VOTE NO for more job strangling regulation.  VOTE NO!!

You may not have any practice calling or writing your Federal Representatives, well now is the time to get that practice.  It’s time to Get Active!  Our country is on the precipice, and we are the last defense of our Freedom and our Constitution.  Our apathy has brought us here!  Our lack of concern is failing our children and grandchildren.  It’s time to Get Active!

So, we ask you to call or write your Federal Representatives; call or write your Local Newspapers and Television Stations… …and tell your neighbors that if they want to prevent their tax dollars from paying for Elections and Re-Election of Democrats and President Obama, they better… …Get Active!

Phone Numbers and Contact information is available on the CCTP Web Site at

For anyone who needs it, the local phone numbers are:

  • Claire McCaskill:                (573) 651-0964
  • Roy Blunt:                            (573) 334-7044
  • Jo Ann Emerson:              (573) 335-0101