Kelly Ayotte Is Latest GOP Senate Candidate To Raise 14th Amendment Concerns (VIDEO)

Already Republican calls to reexamine and potentially modify the 14th amendment have gone from the fringe of the party to the mainstream, with no less than Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) endorsing such efforts.

But if another illustration is needed to prove that amending the 14th amendment is firmly part of the GOP platform, it came Monday morning when New Hampshire Senate candidate Kelly Ayotte strongly hinted that she too favors looking into the issue.

A Democratic source passed on video of Ayotte from a meet-and-greet in Nashua this morning in which she raised concerns about border security, health care abuse among immigrants and (implicitly) the reach and effect of birthright citizenship.

Woman: Is there ever going to be a chance of rewriting that 14th amendment or rewording it so that they have to be legal citizens?

Ayotte: Well, I know that there's a number of proposals that are being brought forward right now to look at that issue. And I think that we should. Because one of the issues is we have to, obviously, when we look at our Constitution, if we're going to propose any changes to it we have to be very thoughtful and careful about that because it's a great document. But that said, we have people who are coming here just to become, to get healthcare and then leave. And they're not even being part of our society and there's something wrong with that. But fundamentally, I think the best thing we can do right now is secure our borders, enforce our existing immigration laws and English is the language of our country.

Ayotte, who went on to endorse Arizona's contested immigration law, isn't the first Republican candidate for office to support looking into changing the 14th amendment (and, to be sure, her wording is a bit garbled in the above remark). Kentucky Republican Rand Paul has offered full support for ending birthright citizenship (in which the children of illegal immigrants born in America automatically become U.S. citizens). So too have Colorado Senate candidate Jane Norton, Arkansas Republican John Boozman and Utah Republican candidate Mike Lee.

But Ayotte isn't Norton, Paul, Boozeman or Lee. If anything, she has been billed as a moderate Republican -- someone who would fit naturally alongside other New England GOPers. So her talk about birthright citizenship repeal (even if it constituted just flirting with the proposition) is notable for what it says about where the Republican Party is going.

The Ayotte campaign did not immediately return a request for comment.

Comments

[madisonhack]

08:07 AM on 08/14/2010

While we're busy repealing the 14th Amendment because it's lost it's relevance in today's changing world, let's also look at that 2nd Amendment and put it into some historical context as well. Totally outlived it's usefulness because we have a standing army and private citizens aren't required to form any "well regulated militias". Just saying.....

[gsggrigsby]

10:54 PM on 08/10/2010

need a copy of the constitution ACLU.GOV FIGHT A BAGGER WITH YOUR OWN COPY I DID AND HE RAN AWAY!

[chazzman]

08:09 PM on 08/10/2010

The "richt party" has been itching for a reason to put forth an amendent to the Constitution. If successful they will try to add :Abortion ban, Segregated Schools, incarceration of minorities for being brown or black, christian church and its rule We might have a problem because of the catholic bible, evanglical bible, the torah, southern baptist interpertation, hindu,methodist,christian science, sciencetology. and of islam.I did not use UPPER CASE for a reason. I think you get my meaning. 3/4 of senate, 3/4 of house, 3/4 of states. just go ahead. open pandora's box. Bad luck to ya's

[TeaLady005]

07:18 PM on 08/10/2010

People that sneak over the border UNLAWFULLY,,,are NOT,,,,,"immigrants" and are NOT "undocumented workers"...!

They are criminals who are in this country UNLAWFULLY! We do not reward lawbreakers with citizenship, amnesty, or anything else.

Millions of LEGAL immigrants enter our country after being given PERMISSION to do so by our Immigration and Naturalization Service. They fill out the application, pay the fees for the processing and background checks,,and wait to be approved. Why would we even think about rewarding lawbreakers who want to "jump to the front of the line" over the thousands of others who are waiting to immigrate? We welcome all LEGAL immigrants!

[Hontas Farmer]

07:57 PM on 08/10/2010

I am glad to see that I am not the only one who thinks that. The only thing more surprising here at Huffpo is that they can bear to give a "pundit" badge to people who aren't hard core left wingers.

[David Melton]

04:50 PM on 08/10/2010

Frack this stupid lady and everyone who doesn't think that vanilla ice cream will save us from the devil. Btw, im the devil.

[disgruntledprogressives]

01:08 PM on 08/10/2010

What Ayotte's remarks say about where the Republican Party is going is it's going all in Tea Bagger, becoming re-branded as the Rebagger Party.

[Greg Petty]

09:23 PM on 08/10/2010

She is a ventriloquist dummy,sitting on another dummies lap,Mitch McConnell

[Hontas Farmer]

09:34 AM on 08/10/2010

One arguement raised here is that immigration was never a problem until it was brown people (i.e. Mexicans and other Latino's) doing it. WRONG!

Consider the following three laws. The first is the Naturalizeation act. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalization_Act_of_1798.
This act increased the residency time before one could become a naturalized citizen to 14 years. This was at a time when most immigration was from Ireland and France.

The "Alien Friends" act http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/United_States_Statutes_at_Large/Volume_1/5th_Congress/2nd_Session/Chapter_58
Which gave the president and hecen federal law enforcement of the day the power to deport any alien that was considered dangerous to the peace and safety of the United States.

The Alien Enemies act Section 2 of link above. Which allowed federal law enforcement to deport any alien who's country was at war with the United States.

When the Sedition act, which prohibited criticism of the government is included these are known as the Alien and sedition acts. They were passed during the Presidency of John Adams.

Now that was long ago but they are PROOF that the assertion that this is just about brown people is not true. We have laws in OUR country that need to be respected.

[QuintinJordon]

09:48 AM on 08/10/2010

I do not disagree with your proof. I simply disagree with the timing of this talk about changing the 14 Amendment.

It is now a political weapon that neither party would deal with over the years. During that time, it helped both parties get what some of their constituents wanted -- businesses received cheap and a political bloc received voters.

[Hontas Farmer]

10:13 AM on 08/10/2010

The voting bloc thing would not apply since Illegal immigrants cannot vote.

My problem with the brown people counter argument is that it forgets that the USA already has brown, black, red and yellow people. All of us came here via a legal (if not pleasant or moral in the case of black people) means. We have been nurtured by this land, sweated for this land, bleed for this land.

We welcome those who wish to sewat and bleed for the US if they at least have the respect to come here the right way. I personally have no love for people who only want to come here to make money and who don't have basic respect for our laws.

Perhaps those laws should be easier to comply with. Immigration is needlessly complex especially from other North American Countries. The law is the law and it needs to be complied with. Lord knows if I broke a US law I would be punished, why should people from elsewhere receive preferential treatment?

[QuintinJordon]

09:34 AM on 08/10/2010

The true hypocrisy of this evolves around the fact that the Republican Party is always crying about how "sacred" the U.S. Constitution is when it involves legislation that changes it.

But let me remind you of the Party that brought us the Patriot Act, free speech zones, and illegal wiretaps.

As I listen to a ex-Congressional member that was a Republican, he states that the founding fathers never envisioned illegal immigration would rise to such a frenzy. Basically, he claimed to "change" with the times from the last ruling made over one hundred some odd years ago, the Congress should revisit the 14th Amendment.

I can say the same about the 2nd Amendment that so many of the Republicans hang their hats upon. One could make a claim the founding fathers never envisioned the day of automatic weapons, sub-machine guns, or semi-auto pistols.

However, the 14th Amendment is their darling, so do not hold your breath on that one.

[QuintinJordon]

09:42 AM on 08/10/2010

However, the 2nd Amendment is their darling... I edit after the fact

[politicalgenius]

08:44 AM on 08/10/2010

why stop at the 14th Amendment? Let's revisit the 3/5 Compromise, grand father clause, womens' right to vote, Civil Rights, Plessy v. Ferguson. I'm sure we could fix our jobs problem to if we just reinstituted endured servitude as well. (HEAVY SARCASM)

if there are a few things we have learned since Nov. 2008 it's there is no telling just how low and divisive Republicans can get to retain control and those who consider the Republicans to be leaders prove that human absurdity and stupidity know no bounds.

[QuintinJordon]

09:39 AM on 08/10/2010

As most of us have been watching how conservative the GOP has become, I have been blogging since G.W. Bush stoled the election of 2000 until recently how the GOP has become the party of subliminal racism, now its evident.

I blogged about the 14th Amendment being a target for years. And I am know I am not the only one that saw this trend coming.

How strange it is when illegals were needed to fill jobs that most Americans would not even consider, it was okay for businesses to hire illegals without much of a fuss from the right, but now since it is a political weapon that works, the Republicans are all over it.

[politicalgenius]

10:28 AM on 08/10/2010

and what's equally absurd is that for those who can see through the once sublime and now blatant racism - hiding behind the guise of free speech - we're condemned as racists for calling out racist behavior.

[robinshood]

08:14 AM on 08/10/2010

She was billed as a moderate Republican by Judd Gregg who promoted her candidacy (part of a struggle for local party leadership with John Sununu Sr.). She's never held political office before so there was no record to point to and had been AG under John Lynch, a popular Democratic governor. She quit to run for office after a year and after promising to serve for two which may explain part of her mama grizzly appeal to the Quitter Queen. But she has shown herself to way to the right of Gregg and completely out of step with most folks in NH. The problem for the Democrats is can they get that message out in a state where nearly all the media is dominantly conservative?

[Hoosierbrad]

08:13 AM on 08/10/2010

I just love it when a Republican candidate is described as "moderate". When you are as far right as the majority of today's Republicans are, a "moderate" today would make Barry Goldwater look like a liberal, by comparison.

[garymc8]

08:03 AM on 08/10/2010

Party of NO concept

[Billar]

07:53 AM on 08/10/2010

The GOP has nothing to offer but fear, loathing and racism.

[ewilder]

07:48 AM on 08/10/2010

"Moderate Republican" is an oxymoron.
I'm begnning to believe the repeal-14th movement is a communist plot. Staln sent over all these sleepers in the '50s and their children became Republican politicians with the intent to destroy the Constitution. That makes them all anchor babies here to destroy our way of life. They do have birth-certificates, but they're all phonies, printed in Russia. Comrade Ayotte (real name Ayottavich) doesn't even look Amercan - where's her American flag earring? She wants to get elected just to get the national healthcare reserved for Congresspeople.
Just say no to the party of no, maybe they'll go back home.

[orianna]

07:42 AM on 08/10/2010

Dems better wake up on this issue.... it is scary enough to leave any constitutional change in the hands of blatantly corporate backed GOP. And the people as a majority want this.

Dropping citizenship entitlements for illegal immigrant children has become a necessity..... wasn't so in 1776, but along with new campaign reform laws now being needed, this has morphed into an achingly needy issue.

[kuulguy]

08:03 AM on 08/10/2010

i wonder what will happen to the Republicans darling boy " Bobby Jindall". Is he going to get deported in this thing happens?. I will love to hear what he has to say about this

[Hoosierbrad]

08:16 AM on 08/10/2010

Yep, we are ALL descendants of illegal aliens, if you look at it from the perspective of the residents of this land who greeted those first people who jumped off the ships in what is now Massachusetts and Virginia.

[Hontas Farmer]

10:19 AM on 08/10/2010

WRONG. When it comes to the Pamunkey, Mattaponi, and the other tribes of the Powhattan nation there exist a number of treaties which legalize the arrival of the white man in their law. Look up the Treaty of Middle Plantation 1677.

Last we aren't ALL illegal immigrants in your way of thinking. Many of us have intermarried with those original residents. We resent being told that we are any kind of immigrants.