Lame for sure. Ducks are favorable here in the great white north this time of year.
How about lame coot.

Please explain how one would "get around" #4. If one requires that the donors submit their SSN's to donate, it's pretty easy to verify citizenship and eligibility. And if you put stiff enough penalties on abrogation which effect the candidate as well...

#3. Actually, I think you'd see the election costs drop sharply - especially if Senate elections were by State Legislatures. Why are they willing to throw so much money at a single position? Because of the concentration of power. Dilute that power and you remove the incentive by diffusing the power base.

#2. Because of the 17th Amendment, both Senators and Congresspeople are popularly elected, meaning that they are subject to mob rule. This has also largely eroded State sovereignty because now there is no one in the Federal Government looking out for the individual interests of the States. There is no better way to reign in the Federal Government than to have the Senate returned to the hands of the States.

#1. Any Executive Branch position can be Impeached. The primary benefit is to give third party candidates a legitimate shot at a position of power. How much of the rhetoric during the last election was all partisan? How many times did you see the "a vote for anyone but Trump is a vote for Hillary" and vice-versa. Let's allow people to actually vote for who they want - not just vote against who they don't want.

Furthermore, it makes the threat of Impeachment actually carry some weight. Currently, power doesn't change hands. That was the Republicans primary excuse for not impeaching Obama - that Joe Biden would then become President.

What powers exactly does the Vice President have? The main one is to preside over the Senate and break ties. But you can't think about past elections in terms of what happened, because this would only affect new elections in the future.

"If we are going to have a president, let him do his job, I thinnk."

The primary duty of the President is to protect the nation against all enemies - foreign and domestic. THAT is the President's job, NOT legislating with a "pen and a phone". We need to get people OUT of the habit of treating the President like a king or emperor. Once the Executive is pared back, who gets in there becomes less of an issue.

Just eliminate the goodies that drive immigrants here. Minimum wages much higher than what they get in their home country, welfare goodies, etc. Remove those, and the unwashed would stop coming.

I would go for #5 immediately. #4 would just be gotten around, so probably wouldnt work. #3 would make elections much more costly, but I do agree that one rep cant possibly represent 1 million people. #2- Not sure what that would do.
#1- That would mean Hillary would be VP. Talk about hatred and obstruction !!! Trump would give her nothing to do, and she would constantly campaign against Trump. If we are going to have a president, let him do his job, I thinnk.

I think that the elimination of the minimum wage and welfare goodies would be a huge deterrent to illegal immigration of unskilled people from south america. I mean, really, why would they want to come here if business here could pay $1 an hour if they wanted. I would hire illegals for that, but the illegals would see no advantage to come here and have to pay the much higher costs of living here.

The Federal government wasn't created with fast action involved. It was meant to be a deliberative body - especially the Senate. Yes, I agree that our current governmental structure is dysfunctional, but that is because we have moved away from a Constitutional Republic towards more of a populist parliamentary system. Here are several suggestions I think would go a long way toward re-establishing a sound foundation:

1) Revise the 12th Amendment and eliminate party-line balloting for President and Vice President. Return the Vice President vote to be the runner-up in the election for President. This should encourage third parties. Just as competition is good in the marketplace, I think competition is good in politics. I would love to see a real Libertarian Party, a real Consitution Party, a real Green Party, a real Blue Dog Democrat Party because I think that in and of itself would reduce the logjams. I think this would also put some teeth back into Impeachment threats of Executive players.

2) Repeal the 17th Amendment and return to having State Legislatures appoint Senators.

3) Increase the size of the House of Representatives dramatically. Currently, there is one vote for about every 1 million citizens. This ratio is WAY too uneven. I'd like to see the House revised to represent no more than 200,000 citizens per district. This would do much to combat gerrymandering and reduce the effectiveness of outside influence/money in House elections.

4) Pass a campaign finance reform package stating that unless you are a member of that particular voting district, you are barred from donating money to a candidate running for office in that district. Representative government only works when those elected actually represent the interests of that locality - not special interest groups across the country. PAC's are similarly restricted: only members (and their monies) residing in a locality are allowed to air ads or participate in political activities.

5) Restrict Cabinet positions to State (foreign diplomatic/intelligence gathering efforts/military), Treasury (taxation and spending), and Interior (FBI, national guard, parks, etc.). All others are disbanded immediately.

I would rather dissuade them from coming here at all than go to the expense of hunting them down and deporting them. Thus the wall. I do agree to the catch and deport with no re-entry, but that policy is worthless without the wall as a first barrier.

"I also think that unless you are a US citizen or a legal resident, u are not subject to minimum wage laws or other workplace remedies like unemployment insurance or workers comp. No welfare benefits or any kind, and no social security."

Agreed. As you do not fall under the jurisdiction of the United States, neither can you appeal to such for protection. You must be referred to your consulate or embassy.

He might as well try getting rid of birthright for illegal aliens and let the libs take it to court and then to the supreme court. Its a real supreme court decision.

Then you're right. He should keep his mouth shut, lame duck that he is.

That's part of the problem President Trump faces. The other part is that he doesn't know what the Constitution allows until he tries it.

I agree with this much: an Act of Congress would be a semi-permanent solution, that would outlast this President. Therefore Senator Graham's announcement is more than welcome.

In April 2018 Speaker of the House Paul Ryan told colleagues he will not seek re-election in November.

The author of the 14th amendment stated he did not mean for birthright citizenship to apply to foreigners, but the explicit exemption is not in the text. The case commonly used to illustrate the right is that of an American-born Chinese denied reentry after visiting China, which the SCOTUS ruled was a violation of his birthright. One problem: both of his parents were legal immigrants with the intent to become naturalized citizens.

The "loophole" the President is leaning on is the phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof." Some legal scholars point to that as relying on potential changes to immigration law. However, laws can't be imposed by executive order, as other presidents have discovered. Immigration law is the responsibility of Congress, and Senator Graham has stated he plans to introduce a law that "clarifies" the birthright citizenship issue to apply only to the offspring of legal immigrants.

To me the issue of the child's citizenship matters less than what happens as a result, which is unfettered chain migration well beyond immediate family. If Congress changes the immigration laws to restrict the chain to immediate family only, then the issue becomes less important.

While they're at it, Congress should restore the guest worker program, institute mandatory E-Verify, and tighten the vetting screws on the lottery immigrant system. There are probably a few more "tuning" changes to the immigration system that need to be done, but those I cited are a good start.

As for the wall, I have a proposal: Because some areas of the border have unique ecosystems that could be damaged by a non-stop wall. Deploy these systems with human detectors https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmuyL... at the locations where a wall might cause problems.

Nothing I have read in the Constitution gives any illegal aliens birthright protections. Just because previous admins have blatantly allowed it does not make it the law. Misinterpretation of the Constitution is exactly why the SCOTUS needs to rule on this and the Congress needs to push it to them. Righting wrongs is what I had high hopes of from DJT

Last night me dino was in a Halloween night mood switching channels between (seen it before) The Evil Dead) and Tucker Carlson followed by Hannity. Can't recall from which show that I learned that well-to-do Russians and other foreigners will fly in, have a baby and fly back nursing an American citizen.
Now me dino thinks of Arnold Schwarzenegger.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WgPeP...
Not that I think Arnold is an anchor baby who can exploit his citizenship here later on. Me dino read long time ago that he came over the correct way as an adult..
As for The Evil Dead, it was scary the first time I saw it. Now I laugh at it. Watched more Hannity than Carslon for some reason. Harrumph!

Gotcha!

There is a bird called a cowbird that lays an egg in another birds nest and forces the surrogate momma bird to raise it at the expense of her own brood. Sound familiar?

leaving it to the congress means LEAVING it period. Congress is worthless in today's divided culture. Anything good would be 100% voted down by democrats, and some number of republicans because they all want to be re-elected. Getting rid of multiple terms would be required before this logjam could be fixed.

I think your ideas are good. I do have a comment on the 'build the wall". We dont need a physical wall if we say that anyone who comes in illegally can be caught and immediately returned over the border from which they came, and can NEVER apply for residency in the USA in the future. No more catch and release. It should be catch and deport forever.

I also think that unless you are a US citizen or a legal resident, u are not subject to minimum wage laws or other workplace remedies like unemployment insurance or workers comp. No welfare benefits or any kind, and no social security.

Senator Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) proposes to introduce appropriate legislation.

Our immigration and citizenship laws are very antiquated. As I understand it, some of them have to do with the emancipation of the slaves and incorporation of them into the fabric of our country during the reconstruction era. This era is LONG past done with, and we should look at the totality of immigration and citizenship from the ground up now. Only take in people from other countries based on merit and performance, and only grant citizenship and voting rights only to those people who want to continue our Constitution.

All excellent points, well-researched! Thank you!

I, too, believe that it is critical to have a natural-born citizen as President of the United States. In my opinion, it should also be a requirement for all House and Senate Electees and appointees to the Supreme Court as well.

I have seen a different interpretation of natural-born citizen, however, one in which at least one parent was a citizen and the original birth certificate stating origin is the defining feature. In such cases, however, the citizen must be born in the nation to which one applies to be a citizen. Anyone born outside the US to parents both of US nationality would retain US citizenship rights - such as John McCain. Anyone born outside the US of only one parent, however, is not a citizen of the US automatically, but must submit an application to Immigration officials. (This is obviously waived for children of diplomats or members of the armed services while deployed.) My understanding is that it is under this interpretation that at least Cruz applied, but I could be mistaken. If neither of Rubio's parents were US citizens at the time of his birth, I would consider him ineligible.

Which is what the President proposed. It's not that the Law of the Soil wouldn't apply at all. It's just that it wouldn't apply to illegal immigrants, any more than it would apply to occupying enemy soldiers or officers.

Gee, you have no idea who I am or what I've said or didn't say during the O years.

You may want to look into who I am and what I've done before you chastise me. I have a long and and public history here and elsewhere that you can verify, if you look.

Direct Congress to pass legislation to stop birthright citizenship. An executive order won't do it.

Good riddance to birthright citizenship when both parents arent even legal residents. How can they be deemed to be under the jurisdiction of any state of the USA if they illegally crossed into the usa.