Birthright Citizenship Debate

Birthright citizenship no doubt plays a big role in the United States. It means that any child born in this country, be it by citizens or illegal immigrants, gains automatic citizenship. Because immigration has always been significant to the United States, the “melting pot,” birthright citizenship has been and is an important topic of discussion. In their articles for Upfront Magazine, Senator David Vitter and American Immigration Council member Michele Waslin present their arguments for and against, respectively, birthright citizenship. Vitter is a Republican against the idea of birthright citizenship. He states that a child is born to immigrant parents in the United States every 93 seconds. This is bad, says Vitter, because those children are children who automatically get the benefits of being an American--the benefits paid for by American tax dollars--without parents who contribute to the country by paying taxes. Vitter tells of the …show more content…
This action would not only create an entire population of individuals in the country who are not citizens, it would reduce the number of individuals born in the country who could grow up and contribute. 295, 000 children born in the United States to undocumented parents in 2013 alone. That’s 295, 000 children who, with the help of America’s superior education system, can grow up and someday contribute to the country. What might those children someday do that would not be possible for them without birthright citizenship? Both sides on the birthright citizenship debate have well-founded, convincing arguments that will surely continue into the future. Further decisions on this topic could potentially have tremendous impacts on the country, with lasting effects. Whatever an individual’s position on the issue, it can surely be agreed upon that citizenship in the United States is something any individual can be proud