5th candidates' views on 'anchor babies'

None of the candidates running for the 5th District seat in Congress is joining a growing call to end the United States’ practice of granting citizenship to the U.S.-born children of illegal immigrants.

Both of the conservatives in the race — GOP nominee Robert Hurt and independent Jeff Clark — support tougher rules to crack down on illegal immigration, but neither wants to tinker with the 14th Amendment in order to end the longstanding practice of birthright citizenship.

The race’s Democratic incumbent, Tom Perriello of Ivy, also opposes the idea, saying it is unrealistic and is a distraction from solving the problem of illegal immigration.

The three candidates’ positions are in contrast with several prominent GOP leaders. House Republican leader John Boehner has said changing the Constitution’s guarantee of citizenship to U.S.-born babies is “worth considering” if it would reduce illegal immigration.

In the Senate, Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., has said he might introduce a constitutional amendment to stop granting citizenship to the children of illegal immigrants. Other top GOP senators have said they would like to hold hearings on the issue.

Hurt, a state senator from Chatham, said he is not a fan of altering the 14th Amendment, but he would take a tougher stance than Perriello when it comes to illegal immigration.

“Before we start making changes to the Constitution, a document I have a profound respect for, I believe that Washington politicians like Congressman Perriello need to start focusing on the real problem, which is allowing illegal immigrants into our country in the first place,” said Hurt. “But, how can we expect Congressman Perriello to fight to fix the problem when he opposes common sense measures like the Arizona immigration law that allows the state of Arizona to enforce the immigration laws that the federal government has failed to enforce for decades?”

Arizona’s new immigration law authorizes police officers to check the immigration status of someone they have reason to believe is in the country illegally.

Perriello, for his part, voted last week in favor of a major border security bill that will generate $600 million to boost the number of border patrol officers and unmanned aerial vehicles patrolling the border in an effort to curtail illegal immigration.

“In the short time Tom’s been in office, he’s already supported a bill that will send an additional 1,000 agents for improved border security in the Southwest,” said Jessica Barba, Perriello’s campaign spokeswoman.

Barba said Hurt’s rhetoric about Arizona’s immigration law rings hollow.

“For the 10 years [Hurt’s] had the chance in the state legislature, he’s introduced nothing like the Arizona immigration law but now that he’s running for Congress, he suddenly thinks it’s a great idea,” she said.

Hurt’s position on the issue, e-mailed to The Daily Progress on Wednesday, seems to contradict a statement he made about birthright citizenship the following day in Chase City.

At a forum held by the Chase City Chamber of Commerce, a questioner asked Hurt: “The 14th Amendment says that anybody that comes into this country and has a child, that child born in this country is a citizen of the United States. When you go to Walmart or wherever, you see all these immigrants with several children — and they’ve always got another one on the way — you don’t know if they’re legal or illegal. But when they’re born here, that puts the expense on us because they have those rights. Do you think we need to put a limit on the 14th Amendment to stop that?”

According to a video of the exchange posted on YouTube by the Democratic Party of Virginia this weekend, Hurt replied: “I think the first and most direct thing that we have to do is, is we’ve got to address the immigration — we’ve got to stop it at the border. And that’s the problem. We’ve just been allowing it to happen. We wouldn’t be having that discussion if we’d just do our job at the border.

“But I think that’s something we have to revisit,” Hurt continued. “Because I think we would all agree our founders did not envision what we’ve got now.”

Hurt’s campaign did not immediately return a call for comment Saturday about the apparent discrepancy between his statements on the issue.

Clark, a businessman and Tea Party member from Danville, said the proposed changes to the 14th Amendment are not the answer to addressing what he sees as the very real problem of illegal immigration.

“If the 14th Amendment has been left alone for all this time, it should probably continue to be left alone,” he said. “It’s a legitimate concern, though. The number of illegal immigrants having children who become citizens in this country is important. But it’s simply a symptom of a greater disease.”

Clark would prefer to increase the number of deportations of illegal immigrants, including pregnant women early in their pregnancy.

 “That would automatically reduce the number of anchor babies that are in this country,” he said.

The problem of so-called anchor babies was a top concern of former 5th District congressman Virgil H. Goode Jr., a six-term Republican incumbent whom Perriello unseated in 2008.

Goode spoke often about how he wanted the stop the practice of granting automatic citizenship to the children of illegal immigrants. After an illegal immigrant has a child in the United States, he argued, she is less likely to be deported and more likely to draw American taxpayer-funded services and benefits.

Goode did not immediately return a call for comment Thursday.

The so-called anchor baby issue is “grossly overblown,” said Doug Ford, director of the Immigration Law Clinic, a collaboration between the University of Virginia’s School of Law and the Legal Aid Justice Center in Charlottesville.

“I’ve never seen something that I would call an anchor baby in our practice and I would challenge anybody to show me where there’s any volume of them in Virginia,” he said.