Congressman Paul believes US immigration law is valid and should be enforced. He opposes amnesty. He believes that the welfare state acts as an incentive to illegal immigrants to come to the country and that the subsidizing of illegal immigration encourages more of it. He has sought to clarify the meaning of the 14th amendment to verify that it does not grant citizenship to children of illegal aliens. In opposing amnesty, Congressman Paul has noted that we have granted blanket amnesty in the past and it only encouraged further illegal immigration. He notes that if we do it again, we will find ourselves in the same situation 10 years from now.
In December of 2005, Congressman Paul proposed a three part plan to address immigration. This plan first consisted of better enforcement of the laws we’ve got-- which plainly call for illegal immigrants to be arrested and deported and for our borders to be secured. Second, he proposed eliminating the two main magnets attracting illegal immigrants to illegally enter the country, the welfare magnet and the citizenship magnet. Finally, Congressman Paul proposes ending birth-right citizenship.
In April of 2006, Congressman Paul used his weekly address to call for an end to birthright citizenship and a return to enforcing US immigration laws. He stated that although it is often said that immigrants do the jobs Americans won’t do, in many instances illegal immigrants simply increase the supply of labor in a community, which lowers wages. He also states that while the labor seems cheap, it is much more expensive after the inclusion of the cost of social services and medical care.
Congressman Paul has also stated that illegal immigration has lead to a balkanization of the US, where the people within the country are subdivided by language and culture. In May of 2007, Congressman Paul opposed the immigration compromise proposed and stated that the agreement surrendered US sovereignty and was nothing more than amnesty in another name.
The subject of a national ID card has been approached numerous times since 9/11. Congressman Paul has repeatedly stated that subjecting American citizens to further scrutiny and identification will do nothing to deter or detract from the actions of those already in violation of the law.
In the Iowa debate, Congressman Paul stated that he did not support employer verification because he did not believe that businesses should be acting as a policing entity. In the Reagan debate, Congressman Paul stated that the citizenship and welfare magnets needed to be turned off.
In 2011, Congressman Paul proposed an immigration plan as part of his 2012 Presidential campaign. This plan included opposing REAl ID, enforcing border security, opposing amnesty, abolishing the welfare state, ending birthright citizenship, and protecting lawful immigrants.
National ID Cards
In May of 2005, Congressman Paul used his "Texas Talk" edition to address the national ID card. He stated that the cards would not stop illegal immigration and would not stop terrorism.
National ID Cards Won't Stop Terrorism or Illegal Immigration May 9, 2005
The US House of Representatives passed a spending bill last week that contains provisions establishing a national ID card, and the Senate is poised to approve the measure in the next few days. This week marks the American public’s last chance to convince their Senators they don’t want to live in a nation that demands papers from its citizens as they go about their lives. Absent a political miracle in the Senate, within two years every American will need a conforming national ID card to participate in ordinary activities.
This REAL ID Act establishes a massive, centrally-coordinated database of highly personal information about American citizens: at a minimum their name, date of birth, place of residence, Social Security number, and physical characteristics. The legislation also grants open-ended authority to the Secretary of Homeland Security to require biometric information on IDs in the future. This means your harmless looking driver’s license could contain a retina scan, fingerprints, DNA information, or radio frequency technology. Think this sounds farfetched? Read the REAL ID Act, HR 418, for yourself. Its text is available on the Library of Congress website.
A careful reading also reveals that states will be required to participate in the “Drivers License Agreement,” which was crafted by DMV lobbyists years ago. This agreement creates a massive database of sensitive information on American citizens that can be shared with Canada and Mexico!
Terrorism is the excuse given for virtually every new power grab by the federal government, and the national ID is no exception. But federal agencies have tried to create a national ID for years, long before the 9-11 attacks. In fact, a 1996 bill sought to do exactly what the REAL ID Act does: transform state drivers’ licenses into de facto national ID cards. At the time, Congress was flooded with calls by angry constituents and the bill ultimately died. Proponents of the REAL ID Act continue to make the preposterous claim that the bill does not establish a national ID card. This is dangerous and insulting nonsense. Let’s get the facts straight: The REAL ID Act transforms state motor vehicle departments into agents of the federal government. Nationalizing standards for driver's licenses and birth certificates in a federal bill creates a national ID system, pure and simple. Having the name of your particular state on the ID is meaningless window dressing. Federally imposed standards for drivers' license and birth certificates make a mockery of federalism and the 10th amendment. While states technically are not forced to accept the federal standards, any refusal to comply would mean their residents could not get a job, receive Social Security, or travel by plane. So rather than imposing a direct mandate on the states, the federal government is blackmailing them into complying with federal dictates. One overriding point has been forgotten: Criminals don’t obey laws! As with gun control, national ID cards will only affect law-abiding citizens. Do we really believe a terrorist bent on murder is going to dutifully obtain a federal ID card? Do we believe that people who openly flout our immigration laws will nonetheless respect our ID requirements? Any ID card can be forged; any federal agency or state DMV is susceptible to corruption. Criminals can and will obtain national ID cards, or operate without them. National ID cards will be used to track the law-abiding masses, not criminals.
Illegal Immigrants and Welfare
In August of 2005, Congressman Paul used his "Texas Talk" to address the subject of illegal immigration and the welfare state in America.
Immigration and the Welfare State August 8, 2005
More and more of my constituents are asking me when Congress will address the problem of illegal immigration. The public correctly perceives that neither political party has the courage to do what is necessary to prevent further erosion of both our border security and our national identity. As a result, immigration may be the sleeper issue that decides the 2008 presidential election.
The problem of illegal immigration will not be solved easily, but we can start by recognizing that the overwhelming majority of Americans- including immigrants- want immigration reduced, not expanded. Amnesty for illegal immigrants is not the answer. Millions of people who broke the law by entering, staying, and working in our country illegally should not be rewarded with a visa. Why should lawbreakers obtain a free pass, while those seeking to immigrate legally face years of paperwork and long waits for a visa?
We must end welfare state subsidies for illegal immigrants. Some illegal immigrants-- certainly not all-- receive housing subsidies, food stamps, free medical care, and other forms of welfare. This alienates taxpayers and breeds suspicion of immigrants, even though the majority of them work very hard. Without a welfare state, we would know that everyone coming to America wanted to work hard and support himself. Our current welfare system also encourages illegal immigration by discouraging American citizens to take low-wage jobs. This creates greater demand for illegal foreign labor. Welfare programs and minimum wage laws create an artificial market for labor to do the jobs Americans supposedly won’t do.
Illegal immigrants also place a tremendous strain on social entitlement programs. Under a proposed totalization agreement with Mexico, millions of illegal immigrants will qualify for Social Security and other programs- programs that already threaten financial ruin for America in the coming decades. Adding millions of foreign citizens to the Social Security, Medicare, and disability rolls will only hasten the inevitable day of reckoning.
Economic considerations aside, we must address the cultural aspects of immigration. The vast majority of Americans welcome immigrants who want to come here, work hard, and build a better life. But we rightfully expect immigrants to show a sincere desire to become American citizens, speak English, and assimilate themselves culturally. All federal government business should be conducted in English. More importantly, we should expect immigrants to learn about and respect our political and legal traditions, which are rooted in liberty and constitutionally limited government. Our most important task is to focus on effectively patrolling our borders. With our virtually unguarded borders, almost any determined individual- including a potential terrorist- can enter the United States.
Unfortunately, the federal government seems more intent upon guarding the borders of other nations than our own. We are still patrolling Korea’s border after some 50 years, yet ours are more porous than ever. It is ironic that we criticize Syria for failing to secure its border with Iraq while our own borders, particularly to the south, are no better secured than those of Syria. We need to allocate far more of our resources, both in terms of money and manpower, to securing our borders and coastlines here at home. This is the most critical task before us, both in terms of immigration problems and the threat of foreign terrorists. Unless and until we secure our borders, illegal immigration and the problems associated with it will only increase. If we took some of the steps I have outlined here - eliminating the welfare state and securing our borders - we could effectively address the problem of illegal immigration in a manner that would not undermine the freedom of American citizens. Sadly, it appears we are moving toward policies like a national ID that diminish our liberties. Like gun control, these approaches only punish the innocent, as criminals will always find a way around the law.
Plan for Immigration
In December of 2005, Congressman Paul used his "Texas Talk" to address immigration reform and enforcement. Congressman Paul also outlines steps that should be taken to fully address immigration.
Small Steps Toward Immigration Reform December 19, 2005
Congress passed an immigration bill last week that takes some small steps toward asserting control over our nation’s porous borders. I supported the bill despite its lack of substance, in the hope that it will move America in the right direction on the critical issue of illegal immigration. Some measures in the bill sound good, but are in effect superfluous. Do we need new legislation requiring the Department of Homeland Security to achieve “operational control of the borders”? Shouldn’t the federal government already have “operational control of the borders”?
Here is a road map for real immigration reform. First we need better enforcement of the laws we’ve got-- which plainly call for illegal immigrants to be arrested and deported and for our borders to be secured. These things are already law, but the executive branch has failed to enforce them for decades. Second, we need to eliminate the two main magnets attracting illegal immigrants to illegally enter the country, the welfare magnet and the citizenship magnet. Failure to address these in an immigration bill raises questions about achieving real results. That is why I introduced three amendments to this bill, in the hopes that we can finally do something about the problem of illegal immigration. I introduced an amendment to end so-called “birth-right citizenship,” whereby anyone born on US soil is automatically an American citizen. I also introduced an amendment to end the practice of providing US Social Security payments to non-US citizens. And finally I introduced an amendment to prohibit illegal aliens from receiving food stamps, student loans, or other federally provided assistance. Without these magnets, we would know that everyone coming to America wanted to work hard and support himself.
There are some elements of this new bill to be applauded. Measures to require detention of and expedited removal of aliens, for example, are a good step. Also to be applauded is the requirement for an additional 250 inspectors at U.S. ports of entry each year from 2007 through 2010, although this is unfortunately subject to the availability of funds. But overall this bill is a weak substitute for real immigration and border reform. As the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) says, HR 4437 “treats some of the symptoms, it does not, in fact, do enough to actually cure the illness.” Congress and the administration are still way behind the American people on the immigration issue. American culture is rooted in political and legal traditions based on liberty and constitutionally limited government—and we rightfully expect immigrants to respect and learn about those traditions. Real immigration reform, based on asserting our sovereign right to retain a cultural identity, will be a huge issue in next year’s congressional elections and the 2008 presidential election.
The Immigration Question
In April of 2006, Congressman Paul used his "Texas Talk" to discuss the question of immigration into the US.
The Immigration Question April 3, 2006
The recent immigration protests in Los Angeles have brought the issue to the forefront, provoking strong reactions from millions of Americans. The protesters’ cause of open borders is not well served when they drape themselves in Mexican flags and chant slogans in Spanish. If anything, their protests underscore the Balkanization of America caused by widespread illegal immigration. How much longer can we maintain huge unassimilated subgroups within America, filled with millions of people who don’t speak English or participate fully in American life? Americans finally have decided the status quo is unacceptable, and immigration may be the issue that decides the 2008 presidential election.
We’re often reminded that America is a nation of immigrants, implying that we’re coldhearted to restrict immigration in any way. But the new Americans reaching our shores in the late 1800s and early 1900s were legal immigrants. In many cases they had no chance of returning home again. They maintained their various ethnic and cultural identities, but they also learned English and embraced their new nationality. Today, the overwhelming majority of Americans- including immigrants- want immigration reduced, not expanded. The economic, cultural, and political situation was very different 100 years ago.
We’re often told that immigrants do the jobs Americans won’t do, and sometimes this is true. But in many instances illegal immigrants simply increase the supply of labor in a community, which lowers wages. And while cheap labor certainly benefits the economy as a whole, when calculating the true cost of illegal immigration we must include the cost of social services that many new immigrants consume- especially medical care.
We must reject amnesty for illegal immigrants in any form. We cannot continue to reward lawbreakers and expect things to get better. If we reward millions who came here illegally, surely millions more will follow suit. Ten years from now we will be in the same position, with a whole new generation of lawbreakers seeking amnesty. Amnesty also insults legal immigrants, who face years of paperwork and long waits to earn precious American citizenship.
Birthright citizenship similarly rewards lawbreaking, and must be stopped. As long as illegal immigrants know their children born here will be citizens, the perverse incentive to sneak into this country remains strong. Citizenship involves more than the mere location of one’s birth. True citizenship requires cultural connections and an allegiance to the United States. Americans are happy to welcome those who wish to come here and build a better life for themselves, but we rightfully expect immigrants to show loyalty and attempt to assimilate themselves culturally. Birthright citizenship sometimes confers the benefits of being American on people who do not truly embrace America.
We need to allocate far more resources, both in terms of money and manpower, to securing our borders and coastlines here at home. This is the most critical task before us, both in terms of immigration problems and the threat of foreign terrorists. Unless and until we secure our borders, illegal immigration and the problems associated with it will only increase.
Secure Fence Act of 2006
In September of 2006, Congressman Paul released a press statement noting his support for the Secure Fence Act of 2006. He also notes that the issue of birthright citizenship needs to be addressed.
Paul Votes for Stronger Border Security
September 14, 2006 Washington, DC: Congressman Ron Paul joined more than 280 of his House colleagues in voting to better secure our nation’s borders. The House of Representatives passed the “Secure Fence Act of 2006” yesterday, taking a needed step toward real immigration reform.
“The problems associated with illegal immigration cannot be addresses unless and until we gain physical control of our borders and coastlines,” Paul stated. The number one priority for Congress should be securing our borders—no immigration reform is possible until then. Once we have control over who is entering the country, we can begin to reform the legal immigration process.”
“Amnesty for lawbreakers is not the answer, and it’s time to rethink birthright citizenship,” Paul added.
The bill passed yesterday requires the Homeland Security Department to gain "operational control" of the country's international borders, authorizes the construction of approximately 700 miles of fencing along the U.S.-Mexican border, requires a study of implementing security systems along the U.S.-Canadian border, and directs the department to evaluate the ability of personnel to stop fleeing vehicles at the border.
Paul has joined a group of colleagues demanding that the Senate pass border security legislation this year. The House passed a strong border enforcement bill nearly one year ago, but the Senate has failed to act on the measure.
Amnesty and the Welfare State
In September of 2006, Congressman Paul used his "Texas Talk" to discuss the relationship with amnesty and welfare.
Amnesty and the Welfare State September 18, 2006
Last week I spoke about simple steps Congress should take to address the problem of illegal immigration. Simple, however, does not mean easy. While the American people are demanding real immigration reform, many in Washington lack the political will to do what is required. That’s why I’ve joined my colleagues in the House Immigration Reform caucus in demanding legislation this year that focuses on securing physical control of our borders while rejecting amnesty in any form. Congress has taken notice, and took an important first step last week by passing the Secure Fence Act of 2006-- legislation that provides physical security by lengthening border walls and creating a virtual border fence that extends thousands of miles. But many Senators, Representatives, and administration officials remain committed to pursuing amnesty in some form. The dictionary defines amnesty as a general pardon for offenders by a government, and most of the immigration reform proposals in both chambers of Congress certainly meet that definition. Millions of people who broke the law by entering, staying, and working in our country will not be punished, but rather rewarded with a visa and ultimately citizenship. This is amnesty, plain and simple. Lawbreakers are given legal status, while those seeking to immigrate legally face years of paperwork and long waits for a visa. What message does this send to the rest of the world? If we reward millions who came here illegally, surely millions more will follow suit. Ten years from now we will be in the same position, with a whole new generation of lawbreakers seeking amnesty. The immigration problem fundamentally is a welfare state problem. Some illegal immigrants-- certainly not all-- receive housing subsidies, food stamps, free medical care, and other forms of welfare. This alienates taxpayers and breeds suspicion of immigrants, even though the majority of them work very hard. Without a welfare state, we would know that everyone coming to America wanted to work hard and support himself. Since we have accepted a permanent welfare state, however, we cannot be surprised when some freeloaders and criminals are attracted to our shores. Welfare muddies the question of why immigrants want to come here. Illegal immigrants also threaten to place a tremendous strain on federal social entitlement programs. Successive administrations support so-called “totalization” agreements that allow millions of illegal immigrants to qualify for Social Security and other programs- programs that already threaten financial ruin for America in the coming decades. Adding millions of foreign citizens to the Social Security, Medicare, and disability rolls will only hasten the inevitable day of reckoning. Social Security is in serious trouble already, and sending benefits abroad to millions of illegal aliens who once worked here will cost hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars. Every American who hopes to collect Social Security someday should stridently oppose totalization and amnesty proposals. The problems associated with illegal immigration will not be solved overnight, but we cannot begin to address them until we take the hard steps of securing the borders, rejecting amnesty, and reclaiming our right as a sovereign nation to control immigration without apology.
Rethinking Birthright Citizenship
In October of 2006, Congressman Paul used his "Texas Talk" address to discuss the need to rethink birthright citizenship.
Rethinking Birthright Citizenship October 2, 2006
A recent article in the Houston Chronicle discusses the problem of so-called anchor babies, children born in U.S. hospitals to illegal immigrant parents. These children automatically become citizens, and thus serve as an anchor for their parents to remain in the country. Our immigration authorities understandably are reluctant to break up families by deporting parents of young babies. But birthright citizenship, originating in the 14th amendment, has become a serious cultural and economic dilemma for our nation.
In some Houston hospitals, administrators estimate that 70 or 80% of the babies born have parents who are in the country illegally. As an obstetrician in south Texas for several decades, I can attest to the severity of the problem. It’s the same story in California, Arizona, and New Mexico. And the truth is most illegal immigrants who have babies in U.S. hospitals do not have health insurance and do not pay their hospital bills. This obviously cannot be sustained, either by the hospitals involved or the taxpayers who end up paying the bills.
No other wealthy, western nations grant automatic citizenship to those who simply happen to be born within their borders to non-citizens. These nations recognize that citizenship involves more than the physical location of one’s birth; it also involves some measure of cultural connection and allegiance. In most cases this means the parents must be citizens of a nation in order for their newborn children to receive automatic citizenship.
Make no mistake, Americans are happy to welcome immigrants who follow our immigration laws and seek a better life here. America is far more welcoming and tolerant of newcomers than virtually any nation on earth. But our modern welfare state creates perverse incentives for immigrants, incentives that cloud the issue of why people choose to come here. The real problem is not immigration, but rather the welfare state magnet.
Hospitals bear the costs when illegal immigrants enter the country for the express purpose of giving birth. But illegal immigrants also use emergency rooms, public roads, and public schools. In many cases they are able to obtain Medicaid, food stamps, public housing, and even unemployment benefits. Some have fraudulently collected Social Security benefits. Of course many American citizens also use or abuse the welfare system. But we cannot afford to open our pocketbooks to the rest of the world. We must end the perverse incentives that encourage immigrants to come here illegally, including the anchor baby incentive. I’ve introduced legislation that would amend the Constitution and end automatic birthright citizenship.
The 14th amendment was ratified in 1868, on the heels of the Civil War. The country, especially the western territories, was wide open and ripe for homesteading. There was no welfare state to exploit, and the modern problems associated with immigration could not have been imagined. Our founders knew that unforeseen problems with our system of government would arise, and that’s precisely why they gave us a method for amending the Constitution. It’s time to rethink birthright citizenship by amending the 14th amendment.
Immigration Compromise Sells Out Sovereignty
In May of 2007, Congressman Paul used his "Texas Talk" to address the compromise in Congress concerning immigration reform to achieve amnesty for illegal aliens.
Immigration 'Compromise' Sells Out Our Sovereignty May 28, 2007
The much-vaunted Senate “compromise” on immigration is a compromise alright: a compromise of our laws, a compromise of our sovereignty, and a compromise of the Second Amendment. That anyone in Washington believes this is a credible approach to solving our immigration crisis suggests just how out of touch our political elites really are. The reality is that this bill will grant amnesty to virtually all of the 12 to 20 million illegal aliens in the country today. Supporters use very creative language to try and convince us that amnesty is not really amnesty, but when individuals who have entered the United States illegally are granted citizenship – regardless of the fees they are charged – what you have is amnesty.
What is seldom discussed in the immigration debate, unfortunately, is the incentives the US government provides for people to enter the United States illegally. As we know well, when the government subsidizes something we get more of it. The government provides a myriad of federal welfare benefits to those who come to the US illegally, including food stamps and free medical care. Is this a way to discourage people from coming to the US illegally?
Additionally, one of the most absurd incentives for people to come to the US illegally is the promise of instant US citizenship to anyone born on our soil. That is why when Congress returns next week I will be re-introducing my Constitutional amendment to deny automatic citizenship to individuals born on US soil to parents who are not US citizens or who do not owe permanent allegiance to the United States .
There are many other very troubling items buried deep in the Senate’s immigration compromise. The bill explicitly calls for an “acceleration” of the March 2005 agreement between the US president, the president of Mexico , and the prime minister of Canada , known as the “Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) of North America .” This somewhat secretive agreement – a treaty in all but name – aims to erase the borders between the United States , Canada , and Mexico and threatens our sovereignty and national security. The SPP was agreed by the president without the participation of Congress. It should be eliminated, not accelerated!
According to the pro-Second Amendment Gun Owners of America, the legislation also makes it easier to target gun dealers for prosecution. Even gun clubs could find themselves targeted under this immigration reform legislation. Immigration reform should start with improving our border protection, yet it was reported last week that the federal government has approved the recruitment of 120 of our best trained Border Patrol agents to go to Iraq to train Iraqis how to better defend their borders! This comes at a time when the National Guard troops participating in Operation Jump Start are being removed from border protection duties in Arizona , New Mexico , and Texas and preparing to deploy to Iraq and Afghanistan ! It is an outrage and it will result in our borders being more vulnerable to illegal entry, including by terrorists. I will continue to oppose any immigration bill that grants amnesty to illegals or undermines our liberty and sovereignty.
Amnesty Opponents are Not Un-American
In June of 2007, Congressman Paul used his "Texas Talk" address to discuss accusations that those who support US immigration laws.
Amnesty Opponents Are Not Un-American June 11, 2007
Although action in the United States Senate this week has slowed passage of the amnesty bill, it is not yet dead as President Bush remains committed to this approach. That is why the President recently suggested that those of us who oppose amnesty for illegal immigrants are unpatriotic. Those of us who strongly oppose the new immigration reform bill before the Senate “don't want to do what's right for America ,” the president said. I reject that assessment as unfair and inaccurate. Supporters of the amnesty bill like to claim that border protection is their first priority. But if enforcement of our borders is the highest priority, certainly a much shorter bill could have been written. Even better, why not enforce existing laws? According to our Constitution, Congress makes the laws that the executive branch is to enforce. The rush to pass this new law seems to obfuscate this simple fact. There are plenty of laws already in place, so it seems sensible to largely solve this problem without new laws. To make matters worse, as I wrote in a recent column, some 120 of our best trained border guards are going to be sent to Iraq to help them with border enforcement! In addition, National Guard troops participating in Operation Jump Start on the Mexican border are scheduled to also be sent to Iraq and Afghanistan . This legislation purports to crack down hard at our borders, but as we have learned time and time again, you cannot address enforcement until you address incentives. That is why you cannot have border security with an amnesty program in place: the incentive of amnesty undermines any crack-down on border protection and in fact just makes work for our Border Patrol all the more difficult. Incentives in place to those who would come to the United States illegally will remain in place if this legislation is passed. Illegal immigrants will still receive federal assistance and free medical care and their children will still gain automatic citizenship after this bill is passed. We need to face the fact that securing our borders means more than legislation, or fences, or even more Border Patrol. It means removing incentives for people to come to the US illegally in the first place. That is why I will once again introduce an amendment to the Constitution to end birthright citizenship this coming week. Although the “reform” of immigration in the amnesty bill is enough to cause alarm, other highly troubling provisions are tucked away that will serve to undermine our sovereignty and weaken our civil liberties. According to the most recent version of the Senate bill, the misnamed Security and Prosperity Partnership for North America is to be “accelerated.” It seems ironic that a project aiming to actually weaken US borders with Mexico and Canada would be added into a bill that purports to toughen border controls. Also, this bill will bring us closer to a national ID card, which without a doubt runs counter to American values and history and will punish American citizens without doing much to counter those who would come here illegally. I strongly disagree with the president that opposing this legislation is unpatriotic. I believe we have an obligation to reject any legislation that promises amnesty to those here illegally, and that undermines the sovereignty and privacy of American citizens.
Illegal Immigration and Border Security
In December of 2007, Congressman Paul used his "Texas Talk" to discuss illegal immigration and border security.
On Illegal Immigration and Border Security
Illegal immigration is on the forefront of many Americans’ minds lately and with good reason. The Center for Immigration Studies has recently reported that our immigrant population is now 37 million, up from 27 million in 1997. 1 in 3 of these immigrants are here illegally. We have a problem that has exploded in the last 10 years with no appreciable change in border security since September 11 when we were supposed to take a hard look at the problem. We have security issues at home and our resources are running thin. Our education system is stretched, and immigration accounts for virtually all the national increase in public school enrollment in the last 2 decades. There is a worker present in 78% of immigrant households using at least one major welfare program, according to the same study. It’s no surprise then that often times these immigrants can afford to work for lower wages. They are subsidized by our government to do so. Right now we are subsidizing a lot of illegal immigration with our robust social programs and it is an outrage that instead of coming to the United States as a land of opportunity, many come for the security guaranteed by government forced transfer payments through our welfare system. I have opposed giving federal assistance to illegal immigrants and have introduced legislation that ends this practice. In the last major House-passed immigration bill I attempted to introduce an amendment that would make illegal immigrants ineligible for any federal assistance. Unfortunately, that amendment was ruled "not relevant" to immigration reform. I believe it is very relevant to taxpayers, however, who are being taken advantage of through the welfare system. Illegal immigrants should never be eligible for public schooling, social security checks, welfare checks, free healthcare, food stamps, or any other form government assistance. The anchor baby phenomenon has also been very problematic. Simply being born on US soil to illegal immigrant parents should not trigger automatic citizenship. This encourages many dangerous behaviors and there are many unintended consequences as a result of this blanket policy. I am against amnesty and I have introduced an amendment to the Constitution (H.J. Res 46) which will end this form of amnesty. I have also supported the strengthening our border and increasing the number of border patrol agents. It is an outrage that our best trained border guards are sent to Iraq instead of guarding our borders. For national security, we need to give more attention to our own border which is being illegally breached every day, and yet the government shirks one of its few constitutionally mandated duties, namely to defend this country. Citizens lose twice with our current insecure border situation – we don’t have the protection we should have, and then taxpayers have to deal with the fallout in the form of overstretched public resources and loss of jobs. The anger is understandable when it comes to illegal immigration and the problems with our borders. I will continue to fight in Congress for more effective ways to address these issues in keeping with the Constitutional mandate to protect America .
Subsidizing Illegal Immigration
In February of 2008, Congressman Paul used his "Texas Talk" address to discuss the fact that if we subsidize illegal immigration then we will get more of it.
If We Subsidize Them...
For decades we have welcomed new immigrants to our American "melting pot". We respect those who come here peacefully to pursue their American Dream. But Americans have noticed lately that modern problems associated with illegal immigration are at a crisis point. Taxpayers are now suffering the consequences. Costs of social services for the estimated 21 million illegal immigrants in this country are approaching $400 billion. We educate 4.2 million children of illegals at a cost of $13.8 billion. There have been almost 2 million anchor babies born in this country since 2002, with labor and delivery costs of between $3 and 6 billion. There are currently 360,000 illegals in our prisons and we have spent $1.4 billion to incarcerate them since 2001. In Prince William County near DC, ICE can't deport criminal illegals fast enough and has actually asked its local jails to slow down on referring them. Jurisdiction over illegal immigration lies at the federal level, yet many municipalities are struggling with the compounding problems of mandated costs and tied hands. My office has heard from at least one sheriff in my district considering seeking compensation from the Federal government for the cost of so many illegal immigrant inmates that wouldn't be here if the Federal government was doing its job and protecting our borders. The problems are widespread. One thing is certain: If we subsidize them, they will come. We have rolled out the social services red carpet, so it is no surprise that many from other countries are eager to come take advantage of our very generous system. We must return to the American principle of personal responsibility. We must expect those who come here to take care of themselves and respect our laws. Not only is this the right thing to do for our overtaxed citizens, but we simply have no choice. We can't afford these policies anymore. Since we are $60 trillion in debt, there should be no taxpayer-paid benefits for non-citizens. My bill, the Social Security for American Citizens Only Act, stops non-citizens from collecting Social Security Benefits. This bill, by the way, picked up three new cosponsors this week and is gaining momentum. Also, we should not be awarding automatic citizenship to children born here minutes after their mothers illegally cross the border. It just doesn't make sense. The practice of birthright citizenship is an aberration of the original intent of the 14th amendment, the purpose of which was never to allow lawbreakers to bleed taxpayers of welfare benefits. I have introduced HJ Res 46 to address this loophole. Other Western countries such as Australia , France , and England have stopped birth-right citizenship. It is only reasonable that we do the same. We must also empower local and state officials to deal with problems the Federal government can't or won't address. Actions like this are a matter of national security at this point. Illegal immigration is draining and frustrating the American taxpayer. I will continue to work for a solution that does not reward those who break our laws.
Securing Our Borders and Data Act
In August of 2008, Congressman Paul released a press statement noting his cosponsorship of the Securing Our Borders and Our Data Act.
Congressman Paul Cosponsors Engel Paul Act For Immediate Release
August 4, 2008
Engel/Paul “Securing Our Borders and Our Data Act”
Washington, DC - Congressman Ron Paul is an original cosponsor of legislation introduced July 31st that would ensure that a traveler entering the United States would be subject to searches of their data and digital equipment only if a border agent has a reasonable suspicion to believe the traveler is or is about to be engaged in criminal activity.
In an August 1, 2008 front page story, the Washington Post exposed the ease with which the government can search and/or seize a traveler’s laptop, blackberry, or other electronic device. A border agent can require any individual to provide access to private or other sensitive data with no cause. They can require the owner to surrender their password for encrypted data as well.
“The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution acknowledges the right of the people to be secure in their persons and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures. It is unfortunate that it takes legislation to remind border agents of this Constitutionally protected right, but it is apparent to me that HR 6702 is absolutely necessary,” stated Congressman Paul.
In August of 2008, Congressman Paul released another statement noting the need for the Act
Engel/Paul "Securing Our Borders and Our Data Act"
Washington, D.C. - Congressman Ron Paul is an original cosponsor of legislation introduced July 31st that would ensure that a traveler entering the United States would be subject to searches of their data and digital equipment only if a border agent has a reasonable suspicion to believe the traveler is or is about to be engaged in criminal activity.
In an August 1, 2008 front page story, the Washington Post exposed the ease with which the government can search and/or seize a traveler’s laptop, blackberry, or other electronic device. A border agent can require any individual to provide access to private or other sensitive data with no cause. They can require the owner to surrender their password for encrypted data as well.
“The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution acknowledges the right of the people to be secure in their persons and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures. It is unfortunate that it takes legislation to remind border agents of this Constitutionally protected right, but it is apparent to me that HR 6702 is absolutely necessary,” stated Congressman Paul.
Immigration 101 Video
In an independently compiled video, a series of official Ron Paul commercials, debate questions, and interviews is compiled together to show Ron Paul's views on immigration.
2008 Campaign Speech
In a 2008 campaign speech, Congressman Paul spoke about his views on immigration.
Des Moines Register Interview
During the 2008 Presidential campaign, Congressman Paul was interviewed by the Des Moines Register about his views concerning immigration.
2008 Interview
Return to National ID Cards
In March of 2010, Congressman Paul appeared on Fox News and discussed the recently proposed national ID cards. He discusses the failure to enforce immigration laws.
Iowa Debate
In August of 2011, Congressman Paul participated in the Republican debate in Ames, Iowa. He was asked about his opposition to the e-verify mandate and stated that he had a strong position on immigration, but that he felt the rule made businesss owners perform policing activites.
FERRECHIO: OK. Congressman Paul, you are opposed to a system that requires employers to verify the immigration status of their workers. Why would you want to eliminate one more tool to help curb illegal immigration?
PAUL: I don't like putting the burden on our businessmen to be the policemen. That means he has to be policing activity.
And I also resent the fact that illegals come into this country, and they do have problems, but if a church helps them and feeds them, we don't blame the church, or at least we shouldn't in a free society. But I have a strong position on immigration. I don't think that we should give amnesty and they become voters. But I do think we should deal with our borders.
But one way that I would suggest that we could do it is pay less attention to the borders between Afghanistan and Iraq and Pakistan and bring our troops home and deal with the border. But why do we pay more attention to the borders overseas and less attention to the borders here at home?
We now have a mess on the borders, and it has a lot more to do with it than just immigration, because we're financing some of this militarism against the drug dealers on the borders right now to the tune of over $1 billion. And there is a mess down there, but it's much bigger than just the immigration problem.
But I do not believe in giving entitlements to illegal immigrants at all. And there should be no mandates on the states to make them do it. (APPLAUSE)
Reagan Debate
In September of 2011, Congressman Paul participated in the Reagan debate for the Republican primary. He was asked about immigration and spoke about fences and immigration.
HARRIS: Congressman, your thoughts?
PAUL: Obviously, it's a very big problem. I think we need to remove the incentive -- easy road to citizenship. Nobody has mentioned the fact that they qualify for benefits as well, you know, the welfare benefits. We shouldn't have to give -- the state of Texas shouldn't be forced to provide free health care and free education.
But there is a mess down there, and it's a big mess. And it's the drug war that's going on there. And our drug laws are driving this. So now we're killing thousands and thousands of people. That makes it much more complicated. But the people who want big fences and guns, sure, we can secure the borders -- a barbed-wire fence with machine guns, that would do the trick.
I don't believe that's what America is all about. I just really don't.
We can enforce our law. If we had a healthy economy, this wouldn't be such a bad deal. People are worrying about jobs. But every time you think about this toughness on the border and I.D. cards and real ideas, think that it's a penalty against the American people, too.
I think this fence business is designed and may well be used against us and keep us in. In economic turmoil, the people want to lead (ph) with their capital. And there's capital controls and there's people control. So, every time you think of fence keeping all those bad people out, think about those fences maybe being used against us, keeping us in.
Fox News / Google Debate
On September of 2011, Congressman Paul participated in the Fox News / Google debate. He is asked about immigration and discusses the need to remove incentives and birthright citizenship.
WALLACE: Congressman Paul, I want to ask you a question about a comment you made a couple of weeks ago about a border fence with Mexico. Here's what you said, sir. I want to quote it: "There's capital controls and there's people control. So every time you think of a fence keeping all those bad people out, think about those fences maybe being used against us, keeping us in."
Question, Congressman, do you know a lot of Americans who want to take their money and flee the United States of America?
(LAUGHTER)
PAUL: There are -- there are some. All the candidates up here talk about repatriation of dollars. They've already taken them overseas.
We're talking about trying to bring in $1.5 trillion because they leave our country, because we make it uncomfortable, too many regulations, too much taxation. They can't start business; they've lost confidence. Yes, when countries destroy a currency, they do lead to capital controls and they lead to people control. So I think it is a real concern.
(APPLAUSE)
And, also, once you have these data banks, the data banks means that everybody is going to be in the data bank. You say, oh, no, the data bank's there for the illegals. But everybody's in the data bank.
That's national ID card. If you care about your personal liberty, you'll be cautious when you feel comfortable, blame all the illegal immigrants for everything. What you need to do is attack their benefits: no free education, no free subsidies, no citizenship, no birth-right citizenship.
(APPLAUSE)
And that would get to the bottom of it a lot sooner. But economically, you should not ignore the fact that, in tough economic times, money and people want to leave the country. That's unfortunate. WALLACE: Congressman Paul, thank you very much, sir.
The Western Debate
In October of 2011, Congressman Paul participated in the Western Debate in Las Vegas. He was asked about a border fence and Latino voters. He states that he would not support a border fence, and that he opposed putting people into groups. He also stated that that rights don't come in bunches to groups and races.
COOPER: Congressman Paul, there's some Latino voters who believe that some of these strong anti-immigration laws -- anti-illegal immigration laws are actually anti-Latino laws. What do you say to them?
PAUL: Well, I think some people do believe that. I think a fence is symbolic of that. And I can understand why somebody might look at that. But when we approach this immigration problem, we should look at the incentives and that -- or the mandates from the federal government saying that you must educate, you must give them free education.
You have to remove these incentives. But I don't think the answer is a fence whatsoever. But in order to attract Latino votes, I think, you know, too long this country has always put people in groups. They penalize people because they're in groups, and then they reward people because they're in groups.
But following up on what Newt was saying, we need a healthy economy, we wouldn't be talking about this. We need to se everybody as an individual. And to me, seeing everybody as an individual means their liberties are protected as individuals and they're treated that way and they're never penalized that way.
So if you have a free and prosperous society, all of a sudden this group mentality melts away. As long as there's no abuse -- one place where there's still a lot of discrimination in this country is in our court systems. And I think the minorities come up with a short hand in our court system.
...
COOPER: Time.
Congressman Paul, you were referenced directly. Thirty seconds.
PAUL: Well, I would like to explain that rights don't come in bunches. Rights come as individuals, they come from a God, and they come as each individual has a right to life and liberty.
But I might add about the border control and the Latino vote, is we lack resources there. I think we should have more border guards on it, a more orderly transition, and run it much better. But where are our resources?
You know, we worry more about the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan. We need to bring the guard units home and the units back here so we can have more personnel on our border.
Campaign Website Statements
ISSUE - Border Security and Immigration Reform
”I don’t think the problem of illegal immigration will ever be solved until we have a healthy, thriving economy.”
The talk must stop. We must secure our borders now. A nation without secure borders is no nation at all. It makes no sense to fight terrorists abroad when our own front door is left unlocked.
This is my six point plan:
Physically secure our borders and coastlines. We must do whatever it takes to control entry into our country before we undertake complicated immigration reform proposals.
Enforce visa rules. Immigration officials must track visa holders and deport anyone who overstays their visa or otherwise violates U.S. law. This is especially important when we recall that a number of 9/11 terrorists had expired visas.
No amnesty. Estimates suggest that 10 to 20 million people are in our country illegally. That’s a lot of people to reward for breaking our laws.
No welfare for illegal aliens. Americans have welcomed immigrants who seek opportunity, work hard, and play by the rules. But taxpayers should not pay for illegal immigrants who use hospitals, clinics, schools, roads, and social services.
End birthright citizenship. As long as illegal immigrants know their children born here will be citizens, the incentive to enter the U.S. illegally will remain strong.
Pass true immigration reform. The current system is incoherent and unfair. But current reform proposals would allow up to 60 million more immigrants into our country, according to the Heritage Foundation. This is insanity. Legal immigrants from all countries should face the same rules and waiting periods.
2012 Presidential Campaign Website Statements
A MATTER OF NATIONAL SECURITY
A nation without borders is no nation at all.
It just doesn’t make sense to fight terrorists abroad while leaving our front door unlocked.
Unfortunately, for far too long, neither major political party has had the courage to do what is necessary to tackle the problem.
Instead, we’re presented with so-called “solutions” that involve amnesty proposals or further restricting Americans’ civil liberties through programs like REAL ID.
Ron Paul opposes both of these schemes and believes they will only make illegal immigration and the problems associated with it worse. He has been proud to see states exercising their Tenth Amendment rights and protecting their citizens by refusing to comply with the unconstitutional REAL ID law.
While the federal government neglects its constitutional responsibility to protect our borders, it continues to push mandates on the states to provide free education and medical care to illegal immigrants at a time when the states are drowning in debt. This must not be tolerated any longer.
Like most Americans, Ron Paul also understands just how valuable legal immigration is to our country.
Immigrants who want to work hard, obey our laws, and live the American Dream have always been great assets.
COMMON SENSE REFORMS
If elected President, Ron Paul will work to implement the following common sense reforms:
* Enforce Border Security – America should be guarding her own borders and enforcing her own laws instead of policing the world and implementing UN mandates.
* No Amnesty - The Obama Administration’s endorsement of so-called “Comprehensive Immigration Reform,” granting amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants, will only encourage more law-breaking.
* Abolish the Welfare State – Taxpayers cannot continue to pay the high costs to sustain this powerful incentive for illegal immigration. As Milton Friedman famously said, you can’t have open borders and a welfare state.
* End Birthright Citizenship – As long as illegal immigrants know their children born here will be granted U.S. citizenship, we’ll never be able to control our immigration problem.
* Protect Lawful Immigrants – As President, Ron Paul will encourage legal immigration by streamlining the entry process without rewarding lawbreakers.
As long as our borders remain wide open, the security and safety of the American people are at stake.
As President, Ron Paul will address immigration by fighting for effective solutions that protect our nation, uphold the rule of law, and respect every American citizen’s civil liberties.
Voting Record
Border Tunnel Prevention Act of 2006
The Border Tunnel Prevention Act sought to impose a 20 year prison term on anyone building a tunnel to bring drugs or people across the border, and a 10 year term on anyone allowing a tunnel to be built on their property. The act passed almost unanimously in the House in roll call 469, but never came up for a vote in the Senate. Ron Paul voted in favor of the Border Tunnel Prevention Act of 2006.
Ron Paul voted in favor of the Border Tunnel Prevention Act of 2006.
Immigration Law Enforcement Act of 2006
In 2006, an effort was made to pass legislation (HR 6095) to give state and local law enforcement \"the inherent authority to investigate, identify, arrest, detain, or transfer to federal custody aliens in the United States\". The legislation also cracked down on smugglers of illegal immigrants. While the legislation passed the house on roll call 468 with bipartisan support, it was tabled in the Senate and never came to a vote. Ron Paul voted in favor of this legislation to enforce immigration laws in the US.
Ron Paul voted in favor of this legislation to enforce immigration laws in the US.
Secure Fence Act of 2006
Another piece of immigration law which actually passed in 2006 was called the Secure Fence Act of 2006 (HR 6061). The legislation was a series of requirements to monitor the border with both manpower and electronic surveillance. The legislation passed the house in roll call 446 with bi-partisan support. Ron Paul voted in favor of this legislation to secure the border.
Ron Paul voted in favor of this legislation to secure the border.
Border Protection, Antiterrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act of 2005
Undocumented Alien Emergency Medical Assistance Amendments
The Undocumented Alien Emergency Medical Assistance Amendments was an attempt to amend the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 to impose conditions on Federal reimbursement of emergency health services furnished to undocumented aliens. The attempt failed in a 331-88 vote. Ron Paul voted in favor of the Undocumented Alien Emergency Medical Assistance Amendments.
Ron Paul voted in favor of the Undocumented Alien Emergency Medical Assistance Amendments.
Makes English the official language of the United States. Requires, subject to exceptions and rules of construction, that: (1) official functions of the United States be conducted in English; and (2) all naturalization ceremonies be conducted in English. Establishes a uniform English language rule for naturalization. Makes English language requirements and workplace policies, whether in the public or private sector, presumptively consistent with the laws of the United States.
To declare English as the official language of the United States, to establish a uniform English language rule for naturalization, and to avoid misconstructions of the English language texts of the laws of the United States, pursuant to Congress' powers to provide for the general welfare of the United States and to establish a uniform rule of naturalization under article I, section 8, of the Constitution.
Declares Executive Order 13166, "Improving Access to Services for Persons with Limited English Proficiency," to be null and void.Prohibits the use of funds for the promulgation or enforcement of an executive order that creates an entitlement to services provided in a language other than English.
Amends the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to declare that, notwithstanding any other provision of the equal employment opportunities provisions of the Act, it is not an unlawful employment practice for an employer to require employees to speak English while engaged in work.
