Babies: from chattel…to anchor babies…to terror childre
by Gebe Martínez, Ann García and Jessica Arons
In the throes of electoral politics, conservatives are suggesting we change the U.S. Constitution to denycitizenship to babies born to undocumented women. This cynical strategy explicitly targets the Latino community to get rid of these new voters rather than do the hard work of cultivating them.
It is fueled by sexism and racism, tapping into a long history of population control — government efforts to curb growth among disfavored populations. During slavery, the children slave owners sired with their slaves were deemed slaves themselves. They could be sold as chattel, increasing the wealth of the owners rather than the size of their families.
Chinese women in the 1800s were labeled prostitutes and denied visas to join their husbands who labored on our railroads. And black women, Native American women, and Latinas were routinely sterilized without their knowledge or consent as recently as the 1970s. Conservatives’ rhetoric is particularly insulting, likening the human birthing process to that of farm animals.
“They come here to drop a child. It’s called ‘drop and leave,’” says Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC). Graham’s comments are especially shocking given his past leading role as a sponsor of comprehensive immigration reform legislation aimed at uniting, not dividing, families. His comments buoyed the push to end birthright citizenship, creating an echo on Capitol Hill where conservative leaders called for hearings on the issue.
Obstetrician-turned- Congressman Phil Gingrey (R-GA) calls the product of “that dropping situation” an “anchor baby.” Arizona State Senator Russell Pearce (RMesa), the architect of SB1070, the state’s anti-immigrant law now being challenged in court, has conceded that his support for changing the Constitution is gender based.
He circulated an email by a former Minuteman official that reads, “If we are going to have an effect on the anchor baby racket, we need to target the mother.
Call it sexist, but that’s the way nature made it. Men don’t drop anchor babies, illegal alien mothers do.”
That type of ethnic profiling against pregnant women already occurred in Utah, even without any sanctioning legislation. Two state government workers sent the names of 1,300 people to law enforcement and the news media because they suspected them of being undocumented. The list included the due dates of pregnant women, a disturbing invitation for hawagon also claim to be “pro-life” and “pro-family.”
Yet they show no hesitation splitting up families through harsh deportation policies or dehumanizing immigrant women and their children with their hateful rhetoric.
By portraying immigrant women as animals who “drop” their offspring, immigration opponents stir up fears that foreigners specifically come here to have children in order to derive citizenship from those children, or claim government benefits. Or, as Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) has suggested, to “raise and coddle” future terrorists.
The fact is that most immigrant women come to the United States to work, not give birth. A child cannot even petition for his or her parents to become citizens until the child is 21.
What’s more, undocumented immigrants have never been eligible for welfare benefits, and new legal U.S. immigrants became ineligible in the 1996 welfare reform law President Bill Clinton signed.
Not coincidentally, two Congressional subcommittees held a joint hearing on seven bills or resolutions to limit birthright citizenship a few months earlier.
Cooler heads must prevail. Senator John Mc- Cain (R-Ariz.), who is in a tough primary election this month, originally didn’t object to birthright citizenship hearings but later opposed changing this part of the Constitution. And the top GOP candidates in California — both women —have also come out against denying birthright citizenship rights. But conservatives keep pushing fringe schemes such as denying pregnant foreigners permission to enter the United States.
So what do they suggest? Administering pregnancy tests to all women at the border? Political satirist Stephen Colbert rightly lampooned its absurdity, mockingly calling for a 2,000-mile latex border fence coated with spermicidal jelly. While ludicrous. this politically manufactured issue is no laughing matter.
We must remind the public that the only “anchors” in this debate are the dead weights that refuse to act responsibly and fix our broken immigration system by enacting comprehensive immigration reform. Targeting women and children instead is a cowardly way out.
(Gebe Martínez is a senior writer and policy analyst, Ann García is special assistant for immigration policy, and Jessica Arons is director of women’s health and rights program at the Center for American Progress. Prepared for Hispanic Link News Service, this commentary condenses a longer analysis which may be found at http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2010/ 08/citizenship_debate.html).
