Immigration Bill Grants Illegals In-state Tuition

Newsmax Insider Report | April 9, 2006 | Newsmax

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

1. Immigration Bill Grants Illegals In-state Tuition

After the Senate Judiciary Committee approved and distributed a proposal for granting legal status to many undocumented aliens, conservatives were alarmed to discover that the 471-page bill makes illegal aliens eligible for in-state tuition costs.

Under the proposal, illegals could pay the low tuition charged students who attend state universities in their home state, while legal residents of the U.S. would still be required to pay the much higher costs charged students who attend schools outside their state, the Washington Times reports.

"This means that while American citizens from Tennessee, Georgia, South Carolina, Massachusetts have to pay out-of-state tuition rates if they send their kids to the University of Virginia or the University of Alabama, people who have illegally immigrated into the country do not," said Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala.

"How much sense does that make, to have people here illegally and they have more benefits than those who are here legally?"

Nine states allow illegal aliens to pay the in-state tuition rates, but the provision is under challenge in those states.

If the new bill passes "the American taxpayers will be forced to pay for illegal aliens to replace their own children in the limited seats in college," said William Gheen of Americans for Legal Immigration.

"Professional polls in North Carolina show over 81 percent opposition to in-state tuition for illegal aliens.

"It is bad enough the Senate is proposing guest worker amnesty. Now they want us to pay college tuition for illegal aliens!"

Sen. Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, supports the proposal, saying "it will free eligible students from the constant fear of deportation."

But Gheen declared: "It is a national tragedy the U.S. Senate is even considering giving these finite resources to foreign nationals that broke our laws."

Gheen said information on how Americans can tell lawmakers of their opposition to the proposal can be found at the group's Web site, http://www.alipac.us.

2. McCain Woos South for 2008 Primary

Despite his questionable conservative credentials, some insiders say John McCain could run a strong primary campaign in the red-state South in pursuit of the Republican presidential nomination in 2008.

The senator from Arizona has visited several Southern states in recent weeks and met with Southern political leaders, the influential publication The Hill reports.

"He's been down there working hard," said Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C.

"He's got a lot of support."

One Southern lawmaker who is mulling support for McCain told The Hill: "He's fully aware that he has to carry some of the South to win the nomination."

McCain has in particular acknowledged the importance of the South Carolina and Alabama primaries.

Several lawmakers and aides interviewed by The Hill said McCain could appeal to voters in the South because of his military background, his support for the Iraq war and his crusade against earmarks.

But McCain's efforts to establish a guest-worker program as part of immigration reform could alienate Southern voters who view the move as amnesty for lawbreakers.

On the other hand, some lawmakers have told The Hill that "Southern conservatives could be more inclined to back McCain based on his chances in a general election if Democrats nominate Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton."

3. Justice Kennedy Attacks Editorial Writers

Editorial writers who analyze Supreme Court decisions should "read the opinions before they write their editorials," says Justice Anthony Kennedy.

Kennedy's comment came in an address to the American Society of International Law in Washington, in response to a question about how the group could improve the public's understanding of Court opinions.

Even though daily news reporters are under deadline pressure, they do a fairly good job of explaining what the Court did, although "not why we did it," Kennedy said.

Editorial writers, on the other hand, "do not have the excuse of time pressure" and often "misinterpret" the court's reasoning.

Kennedy launched a similar attack on editorial writers at an American Bar Association gathering in November, the Washington Post reports.

But Steve Chapman, a longtime editorial writer for the Chicago Tribune, told the Post: "I wouldn't dream of writing an editorial about a Supreme Court opinion without reading it."

And Fred Hiatt, the Post's editorial page editor, said his staff reads "all the court's opinions before writing our editorials. If he thinks we've made mistakes, I'd love to her from him."

4. Conservative Rabbi Warns Against Liberal Shift

The chancellor of the Jewish Theological Seminary of America has accused liberal rabbis of undermining the Conservative Jewish movement by calling for reform on such issues as same-sex marriage.

In his final address to his fellow Conservative rabbis at a convention in Mexico City, Ismar Schorsch - who is set to retire in June - said: "What ails the Conservative movement is that it has lost faith in itself. Internally, we have already become Reform, and it will only be a matter of time before we [externally] appear like Reform."

In an interview with the Jewish publication Forward, Schorsch complained about what he called the Conservative movement's "deconstructionists" - particularly rabbis and activists pushing to overturn the movement's opposition to same-sex marriage and the ordination of gay clergy.

Schorsch's remarks failed to persuade some younger rabbis, Forward reports.

"I was really disappointed with his talk," said Miami Rabbi Micah Caplan, 29.

"We are not touching people of my generation. In my opinion we are 20 years behind the Reform movement on a number of issues."

But Schorsch warned that if the Conservative movement does shift to the left, "then it's going to pay the price down the road."

He said that if reform is passed, some clergy and lay people with leave the movement.

5. Bolton Foe Voinovich Now Praises Ambassador

The Republican senator who staunchly opposed the nomination of John Bolton as America's ambassador to the United Nations has done a complete turnaround, saying Bolton is "a changed man."

Sen. George Voinovich even said he might support Bolton if President Bush tries to renew his appointment.

Bush temporarily installed Bolton while Congress was in recess after Ohio Sen. Voinovich joined most Democrats in blocking a Senate vote on Bolton's nomination last May, and Bolton became ambassador on August 1.

Voinovich had described Bolton as "everything a diplomat should not be." He called Bolton a bully who would make needed U.N. reforms more difficult to achieve.

But he said he has been watching Bolton closely since he took the post, and told reporters:

"John Bolton at this point is a changed men. I want reform of the United Nations, so I've worked with John and stayed on top of John to make sure he takes this wonderful opportunity."

Voinovich said he's been pleased by Bolton's flair for diplomacy since coming to the U.N.

"It's a whole different attitude from the old attitude," he said.

Bolton's appointment expires in January. If Bush reappoints him, Voinovich said he "might not take the same position as last time."

6. ?Friends' Tops in Ad Pricing

Ever wonder how much it costs to buy a 30-second ad on a syndicated TV show? Be prepared to pay an average of $222,197 for a spot on "Friends."

Other pricey shows include "Everybody Loves Raymond ($159,907), "Seinfeld" ($156,793) and "Entertainment Tonight" ($131,729), according to Advertising Age.

"Wheel of Fortune" and "Jeopardy!" both get higher ratings than those four shows. In fact, "Friends" ranks only 10th on the list of the 25 top-rated syndicated shows, behind such offerings as "Dr. Phil" and "The Oprah Winfrey Show."

But neither quiz show commands more than $92,190 for a 30-second ad.

Looking for a bargain? A spot on "Frasier" costs only $40,193, and on "The Drew Carey Show," $40,250.

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

Didn't Voinovich actually burst into tears over the Bolton nomination? Or was that outburst over something else?

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

Subversive immigration bill PING!

[ncountylee]

Yup...Voinovich actually did burst into tears over the Bolton nomination. The girly-man demonstration was shameful.

[Aetius]

I believe there was NYTimes article about Justice Kennedy last week, which basically implored Kennedy to become the new O'Connor; i.e. the vote to ensure that the Sup Court continues to side with the Left in the Culture War.

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

If the Chicoms attack us, you'll probably find this guy hiding under the bed.

[Mike Darancette]

conservatives were alarmed to discover that the 471-page bill makes illegal aliens eligible for in-state tuition costs.

Will they be eligible for financial aid?

[HumanitysEdge]

Illegal’s rights > citizen rights = WRONG!

[Squantos]

1860: "But without African slaves, who will pick the cotton?"

2006: "But without illegal aliens, who will pick the lettuce?"

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

Will they be eligible for financial aid?

Why not? It seems that everything else is being handed to them.

[NapkinUser]

This must be stopped.

[upchuck]

After the Senate Judiciary Committee approved and distributed a proposal for granting legal status to many undocumented aliens, conservatives were alarmed to discover that the 471-page bill makes illegal aliens eligible for in-state tuition costs.

I wonder how many Senators have read this entire bill? I suspect they push such menial tasks off on their staff. They, after all, have much bigger fish to fry, such as making arrogant speeches from the floor, preening for the TV cameras and voting themselves undeserved pay raises.

[Savage Beast]

If illegal aliens get in-state tuition, I want in-state tuition--in any state I decide to move to!!!

[TBP]

75 percent or more of Americans support tighter border security and oppose benefits for illegals, yet Congress and the Administration insist on pandering to these lawbreakers. It's offensive, it's obscene, and everyone who supports this amnesty bill, especially with provisions like this one in it, should be removed from office. And we should let the world know why.