Posted on 09/27/2011 2:51:19 PM PDT by smoothsailing
Chuck DeVore
September 27, 2011
Last week’s Republican Presidential debate confirmed one thing: Texas Governor Rick Perry’s main challenge in winning the Republican nomination will be his ability to explain his record on illegal immigration as governor vs. what he proposes to do about it as President.
Perry’s opponents have hit him for signing in 2001 the nation’s first law allowing illegal immigrants to get the in-state tuition break that other Texans who attended high school in-state receive. Four lawmakers out of 181 voted against the bill, as Perry has pointed out, making the bill uncontroversial at the time. (Note: as a California lawmaker from 2004 to 2010, I consistently voted against expanding benefits to illegal immigrants.)
Today, 12,138 illegal immigrant students pay in-state tuition in Texas, about one percent of all Texas college students. By comparison, the Department of Homeland Security estimates that 7.0% of Texas residents are in the nation illegally.
Gov. Perry has pointed out more than once, and with a degree of exasperation, that Texas has spent $400 million of its own taxpayers’ money on border security, hiring additional Texas Rangers to better secure the border. Perry has also defended his insistence that a fence not be built along the entirety of Texas’ 1,969 mile border with Mexico, citing the fact that a river runs along the border through some very remote and rugged terrain that is best secured with “boots on the ground” and “aviation assets.” I have to agree with Perry on this one, building a fence along a river is costly while the river itself will constantly undermine the fence’s footings. In addition, Gov. Perry’s Texas has passed a law that requires a photo ID to vote (only 13 other states have photo ID laws on the books) and illegal immigrants cannot obtain a driver’s license in Texas (11 states issue driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants, including Sarah Palin’s Alaska).
Dismissing Texas’ own border security efforts, Perry’s opponents have focused on the in-state tuition, calling the law a magnet for illegal immigration. Theoretically, that’s true. But does it actually impact an illegal immigrant’s decision about what state they may decide to live in? I find it hard to believe a 22-year-old man from central Mexico is going to say to himself, “Hey, I’m going to move to California or Texas because, when my two children become college age in 17 years, I can save some tuition money.” Rather, the decision to break U.S. law more likely comes down to the availability of jobs and the seriousness with which the Federal government secures the border.
To test this proposition, it is instructive to see where illegal immigrants live in the U.S. According to the Department of Homeland Security, the largest illegal immigrant population by state in 2010 was:
California: 2,570,000
Texas: 1,770,000
Florida: 760,000
Illinois: 490,000
Arizona: 470,000
Georgia: 460,000
New York: 460,000
North Carolina: 390,000
New Jersey: 370,000
Nevada: 260,000
As one would expect, larger states have larger illegal immigrant populations, and larger states on the border with Mexico have an even larger illegal immigrant population.
But, how do these statistics compare to the size of the state? What percentage of the state’s population is composed of illegal immigrants?
Nevada: 9.6% illegal
Arizona: 7.4% illegal
Texas: 7.0% illegal
California: 6.9% illegal
Georgia: 4.7% illegal
New Jersey: 4.2% illegal
North Carolina: 4.1% illegal
Florida: 4.0% illegal
Illinois: 3.8% illegal
New York: 2.4% illegal
National average: 3.5% illegal
Next, let’s compare the state’s system of welfare benefits to illegal immigrants as well as the state’s in-state tuition policy.
Nevada: 9.6% illegal; low welfare, no in-state tuition
Arizona: 7.4% illegal; low welfare, no in-state tuition
Texas: 7.0% illegal; low welfare, in-state tuition
California: 6.9% illegal; high welfare, in-state tuition
Georgia: 4.7% illegal; low welfare, no in-state tuition
New Jersey: 4.2% illegal; high welfare, no in-state tuition
North Carolina: 4.1% illegal; low welfare, no in-state tuition
Florida: 4.0% illegal; low welfare, no in-state tuition
Illinois: 3.8% illegal; high welfare, in-state tuition
New York: 2.4% illegal; high welfare, in-state tuition
This analysis tells us that the states with the highest percentage of illegal immigrants, Nevada and Arizona, don’t use many state resources to assist them while Illinois, with an average number of illegal immigrants, and New York, with a below-average number of illegal immigrants, are the most generous. Thus, data suggests that state assistance to illegal immigrants isn’t much of a magnet. Other factors must be at work here.
Demand for labor is the driver, with illegal immigrants concentrating in the construction, hospitality, and agriculture sectors. Until recently, both Nevada and Arizona were experiencing housing booms and 27% of Nevada workers labor in the hospitality industry. On the other end of the ledger, both New York and Illinois experienced very little population growth; therefore, saw few construction jobs relative to other states.
Lastly, it’s interesting to compare these states’ tax policies to their illegal immigration populations:
The Tax Foundation’s 2011 State Business Tax Climate Index ranks the states with the largest illegal immigrant population as follows:
Nevada: 9.6% illegal; 4th most-competitive tax policy
Arizona: 7.4% illegal; 34th most-competitive tax policy
Texas: 7.0% illegal; 13th most-competitive tax policy
California: 6.9% illegal; 49th most-competitive tax policy
Georgia: 4.7% illegal; 25th most-competitive tax policy
New Jersey: 4.2% illegal; 48th most-competitive tax policy
North Carolina: 4.1%; 41st most-competitive tax policy
Florida: 4.0% illegal; 5th most-competitive tax policy
Illinois: 3.8% illegal; 23rd most-competitive tax policy
New York: 2.4% illegal; 50th most-competitive tax policy
Perhaps it isn’t a coincidence that Nevada, the state with the most attractive business tax policy on the list, has the highest percentage of illegal immigrants, while New York, the state with the worst tax policies in the entire nation, would have the fewest illegal immigrants as a percentage of its population.
It shouldn’t be a shock to conservatives that, just like the wealthy, illegal immigrants respond to state taxes and the impact those taxes have on the economy.
Perhaps if Governor Perry worked to pass a Texas state income tax, the illegal immigrant population there would plummet (of course, he’d have an even bigger challenge in winning the Republican nomination as a tax-hiker).
This brings us to a final observation. Other than raising taxes to the bone-crushing New York level, just how much can a state do in the realm of illegal immigration, a basic Federal responsibility? The answer appears to be not much, given Arizona’s high-profile efforts at curbing illegal immigration and given that Arizona’s per capita illegal immigrant population is greater than that of all states except Nevada.
Having served as a governor is excellent preparation for being President. That said, a governor has different responsibilities than does a President.
Rather than focusing on what education bill Perry signed into law in 2001, Republicans should be more concerned about what policies their prospective nominee has today on immigration, both legal and illegal. Do they approve of an amnesty on the scale of the 1986 amnesty that many Reagan Administration veterans later viewed as a huge error? Do they want to change an H-1B visa program that business sees as a way to keep technical labor costs down but that many highly-skilled American workers see as undermining their ability to earn a good living? How do they propose to better secure the border, and can they do it without eroding Americans’ liberty? These are proper questions for those who would be President and the sooner we can move beyond “gotcha” debate moments and into substantive policy discussion, the better.
Because that's Federal Law. Here in CA we passed Prop. 187 which demanded proof of legal residency to enroll in school. A Federal judge tossed it out.
I got a kick out of one commenter over there, he called all the Perry bashers "Pauliwogs"! LOL!
I hope it's being contested, or did CA lay down like sheeple?
Yours is a reasoned assessment, and I appreciate you taking the time to post it. I expect Perry to focus like a laser on what he and his team consider to be important to voters and not waste much effort on the superficial carping coming from his detracters. Everthing I’ve learned about him tells me he is a disciplined, tireless, and aggressive campaigner who governs that way as well. If he will allow his core beliefs and traditional values to guide him he’ll do just fine.
If you think you are going to convince us we didn't hear what we clearly heard,well...go ahead, waste all your time and energy insulting everybody's intelligence.
LOL
I make sure the people I hire to work on my house are legally here. I thought every good conservative did that.
“Total Bull, there is not a state that does not define what is in state and out of state. Where in the hell did you pull such a stupid ideal out of. While perry was dancing with His pom poms I had to prove to the state, of choice, for my education that I had changed my home state while on active duty. Which was allowed for under the GI bill at the time. But you are saying that an illegal has the right to go to any school. BS.”
EXACTLY - you write down where you live, how long, and possibly show some proof. And if an illegal is DUMB ENOUGH to write down an address in Mexico, they’re considered out of state, otherwise they’re in-state, UNLESS someone asks them for proof of citizenship.
That was 15 years ago. The appeals failed.
“We passed the law in Virginia, so that people had to prove their legal status. Until we passed that law, illegals WERE getting in-state tuition in our colleges.”
Stay out this with your Virgina crap. Here in Texas no one would EVER take advantage of a system that doesn’t check on citizenship. LOL.
“I wanted to know if there was also a requirement to show your visa in order to attend college or do they just assume you already had one since you needed it just to enter the country?”
Fair question. My kids have enrolled in colleges maybe half a dozen times here in Texas. Yes they had to prove they lived here long enough for in-state tuition. NEVER did they have to prove they were in America legally.
Since Perry encourages illegals to enter Texas by rewarding them, who’s paying for illegal aliens to pump out nearly 1000 anchor kids per month at Parkland Hospital in Dallas?
I love that logo!
Did you put Perry the Texas Platterpus on there?
I agree, Santorum made an excellent senator from PA.
But frankly not ready for the White House.
First the student from abroad has to apply for admission to a university or college approved by the Government for foreign students. Then you apply for the student visa to an American consulate along with the letter of admission and other requirements. If approved that visa gets stamped in your passport from your country of origin. That visa then allows the student to enter legally into United States.
Work permits are quite different from amnesty. That may be the only practical solution to the problem. At the very least it will force identification of who is here, where are they working, and segergate those who are not doing any work, and just depending on taxpayer funded welfare. So If Cain said something in that context, he has good instincts IMO.
I know one answer to that! My own kid wanted to go to an out of state university because her friend was going there. We explained to her that we could not afford the additional tuition and so she is now attending the in state university.
The federal government offers financial aid under Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA). Anyone can apply IF they have a Social Security number. NOTE THAT: Illegals have to be willing to use forged documents and to falsify official applications (a felony). The bottom line is that illegals get taxpayers to subsidize student aid for their kids. No word on the loan default rate. Ricky won't tell, that's for sure.
=================================================
So, you ask, how do illegals get SS nos, drivers' licenses, and other proofs of citizenship.......if they are illegal? read on
THE LUCRATIVE PHONY ID BUSINESS---DOCUMENTS FOR A PRICE July 21, 2006 -- Pelcastre brothers, Angel and Jorge, Dallas, Texas, were a walking threat to US national security, expert document forgers who, for a few thousand dollars, could give anyone a new identity.
The Texas brothers turned a NJ hotel room into a business office and were readying a massive cache of fake Social Security cards for delivery to a local NJ identity broker. The Texas brothers were a "one-stop shop" for a myriad of fake US documents, including birth certificates, Social Security cards, driver's licenses for any state in the US, passports and resident alien cards, said state police.
Officers happened upon two cars bearing Texas plates in a NJ hotel parking lot. Authorities wouldn't identify the NJ hotel by name for fear it would spark retribution from savage drug cartels operating in the US.
The Texas brothers were followed to a NJ office supply store nearby where they purchased computer supplies. Officers then followed the Texans to a NJ storage facility in Secaucus, NJ, where the Texans loaded several boxes into a car. One of them stood lookout.
L/E approached the Texas brothers when they returned to the NJ hotel and questioned them separately. The Texas brothers consented to a search.
Police recovered laminating sheets with built-in security features, pages of blank documents waiting for fake names and information, finished documents, computers and software to create the fake IDs.
All told, the haul was worth about $500,000 on the street. Police also recovered $6,000 in cash, which was the first payment from a NJ fake document broker for a shipment of 500 fake Social Security cards. ####
==============================================
A key question Perry failed to tell American is the number of identities legals and illegals are using.
Jose Madrigal, the Washington state rapist, had some 30 identities.
All of them riding the US gravy train. All of them cashing numerous
govt checks. And, as Perry knows well---all of the identities are voting.
Illegals are more likely to be collecting government checks than picking crops......despite the incessant latino-as-victim propaganda. One illegal used several identities obtained with forged documents to collect some $3.5 million unemployment checks..........and was convicted of identity theft.
========================
REFERENCE---illegals use numerous fake identities b/c they know it makes them harder to track. They got scams galore......they could be using one identity for in-state tuition, another to apply for legal status, and several more to ride the US gravy train. "Impoverished" illegals establish multiple identities by buying forged and falsified documents for several thousand dollars.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.