Hmmmm

From Yahoo news:  "Leading Republicans are joining a push to reconsider the constitutional amendment that grants automatic citizenship to people born in the United States."  I don't think anything will come of it; since when have politicians had this kind of courage?  However........

Well, at least I consider this a step in the right (i.e. correct) direction.  Clearly the amendment was written at a time when people made a huge effort to move to this country and make a place for themselves here.  Modern travel methods have clearly made that effort obsolete.  Now there is at least the fear that people come to this country for a day just to have a baby here and obtain the associated rights for that baby.  And for the child's parents. 

I guess that perhaps I would like to modify the 14th Amendment.  Let's think about the different children we are talking about. 

1. A child born of a woman who simply walked across the border for the day. 
2. A child born of a woman who is here illegally; either by overstaying a visa or by sneaking into the country by some other means.
3.  A child born of a woman who is here legally; though of limited duration - i.e. a student visa.
4.  A child born of a woman who is here as a legal immigrant (with a green card).

It seems to me to be obvious that the first two examples are people who need not be granted citizenship.  The third example is at least questionable; if the mother isn't intending to stay, why would the child?  However the final option would seem to be completely reasonable candidate for citizenship provided that he or she was willing to take the oaths required of new citizens. 

BTW, my FIL is the son of a wetback so this discussion hits close to home.