So, the latest stupid, racist idea from a Republican? Deny American citizenship to the children of illegal immigrants who are born in America. And the latest stupid, unconstitutional vehicle to accomplish the latest stupid, racist idea: A federal law, which, for those who never really paid attention in civics, cannot trump the U.S. Constitution.

How stupid and how racist is this idea? Even the House Republican leadership won’t bring a bill by U.S. Rep. Nathan Deal, R-Ga., to a vote. Don’t think they’re getting all principled or anything; they’re really just afraid of people noticing how stupid and racist Deal’s bill really is.

It’s too bad, too, since there’s constitutional grounds for rejecting the idea. The 14th Amendment, adopted after the Civil War, says “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”

And that means you can pass all the laws you want, but all persons born in the United States are citizens, and if you want to change that, you’ll need a little thing we like to call a “constitutional amendment.” And that’s true even if a majority of Americans disagree with the notion that any child born on U.S. soil is a citizen.

“Most Americans feel it doesn’t make any sense for people to come into the country illegally, give birth and have a new U.S. citizen,” says Ira Mehlman, of the Federation for Immigration Reform. “But the advocates for illegal immigrants will make a fuss; they’ll claim you’re punishing the children and I suspect the [congressional] leadership doesn’t want to deal with that.”

Didn’t you hear us, Ira? It doesn’t matter if it makes sense to you, it’s a matter of constitutional law. It doesn’t make sense to us that there’s a big-ass school zone in the middle of Sahara Avenue at Valley View Boulevard, either, but we still slow down for it. (Sometimes.)

Plus, we’re not advocates for illegal immigration. We have the same security worries that other good, non-racist Americans have about our borders. But we also think the Constitution means what it says, and we don’t think abandoning it every time a thorny problem rears its ugly head is a workable solution. So, it’s not in order to avoid “punishing the children” that we oppose Deal’s bill; it’s in order to avoid punishing the Constitution.

Oh, and also the bill is stupid and racist. Did we mention that?

Now that the fake “centennial” is over, the city of Las Vegas will still be getting money from the sale of those popular but historically inaccurate license plates, money that will be used to fund “historical preservation” into the future.

Although we disagree with commemorating fake dates pulled right from air, we totally support historical preservation, especially in a town that likes to blow up its past to build shiny new monuments to its present. Preserving the downtown post office, neon signs from casinos long closed, and other historical artifacts around town is a great idea.

And here’s another one: Perhaps the City Council could set aside just a few dollars (after the aggrieved Clear Channel is paid off for its extra costs in staging that Red Hot Chili Peppers concert during the Red Hot Las Vegas Summer) for a special project.

The project: Celebrating the real 100th birthday of Las Vegas, six years from now in 2011, which is precisely 100 years from when the city was formally incorporated in 1911. You don’t have to have the world’s largest birthday cake, the world’s largest New Year’s toast, more than $200,000 in taxpayer money spent on city employees to “manage” the celebration or anything like that. Maybe just a few balloons and a little party outside City Hall. That’d be nice.

Well, this is a pickle: U.S. Sen. Harry Reid gets reelected to the Senate in 1998 and 2004 on the promise of bringing home the bacon to Nevada; he gets elected minority leader of the Democrats and still Nevada ranks dead last in per capita federal spending ($5,467.20 per person in 2004), despite Las Vegas being the fastest-growing state in the nation?

Now that’s got to be just a tad embarrassing. Good thing he’s not up for reelection until the end of the decade.

It turns out Alaska, home of nepotist Gov. Frank Murkowski, who appointed his daughter Lisa Murkowski to the Senate, and the creepy, angry U.S. Sen. Ted Stevens is No. 1 in per capita federal spending, at $12,885.17 per resident, according to the Census report. (Maybe there are more bridges to more nowheres than we know about?) Virginia, Maryland, New Mexico and Hawaii all ranked in the Top 5.

Oh, and the figures don’t include money spent on foreign aid, to pay interest on the ever-growing national debt or money for the CIA, DIA and NSA, which was potentially used to eavesdrop on your overseas phone calls.

So, what gives? The Review-Journal couldn’t reach Reid, but it did reach Assemblyman Mo Denis, who’s the next best thing, and who promised to look into this matter forthwith.

Still, we can’t forget the reams of news releases from Reid, U.S. Sen. John Ensign and the rest of our congressional delegation boasting about how much money they’re always bringing home. Do they count spending on congressional news release writers and faxes in the per capita state spending? If so, we’re sure Nevada would rank higher, just on the efforts of U.S. Rep. Jim Gibbons alone. (Dude sends out a ton of news releases.)

Anyway, Reid promised to bring home the bacon, which is why we voted for him — twice. (OK, we really voted for him because we liked him better than Ensign or 2004 challenger, Richard Ziser.) But still: We want our money, Harry! Preferably in small, unmarked, non sequential bills delivered in a brown canvas bag. You know where our office is, right?