Rick Perry an immigration radical? Hardly

That incendiary line of attack in the free-for-all among Republican presidential hopefuls begs for a deep breath and a dose of rational reflection.

Since 2001, Texas has allowed students to qualify for in-state college tuition if they've lived in the state for three years leading to high school graduation, completed their studies for a diploma or a GED, and enrolled at a public higher education institution.

Citizens, legal residents and other immigrants can get lower rates under the law. Students who meet the criteria but aren't U.S. citizens yet must file a statement that they intend to seek legal status.

The policy, which won widespread support in the Legislature before getting Perry's signature, has moral, practical and financial dimensions.

Support has come from the influential Texas Association of Business and chambers of commerce, as well as educators, the Texas Catholic Conference and civil libertarians.

In 2009, Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott upheld the law. This summer, the U.S. Supreme Court also rejected a challenge to a similar law in California.

Competitive wrestling term ~ "riding time" ~ you have a situation where two wrestlers compete within a limited time frame. Neither pins the other for a clear win. So, who wins the match? Well, the guy on top the longest! (On top is interpreted a number of different ways). That's riding time.

With illegal aliens our laws are such that no illegal alien has riding time for that period when he was here as an illegal ~ should he later on become "legal".

Believe it or not there's a Supreme Court case coming up where the "legal" but formerly "illegal" alien got caught kidnapping/smuggling chillun over the border. He is/was a coyote ~ a dealer in human flesh.

Well, he got caught, and the question is do we kick him out AFTER he's done his time for being human scum, or does he get to stay here. He's 18.

As much as Perry might want to give him instate tuition it won't happen though because he's "legal" and it's a different state.

Well, anyway the guy argues that the law allows him an exception to deportation should the crimes he committed fall within the early part of his probationary period, but if they were committed later on during that period he'd have to be kicked out.

He'd earlier been here with his baby-daddy during that man's probationary period, so the prosecution says "Yeah, he already reached the later part of his probationary period so he's the kind of scum we don't need more of ~ we are oversubscribed".

His lawyer says, "No, no, my boy here just now became 'legal' so he's really in the EARLY PART of the probationary period so when he gets out of prison he doesn't have to go back".

So, it's a live dispute. Riding time is real. People get deported over it, and there are a gazillion "dates of" this and that in immigration law.

Did you know they have a university in India that teaches ~ YES TEACHES ~ students to become AMERICAN immigration lawyers.

Their first task is to get themselves a green card!

Note: there are several states where "football fans" (my guess as to their true identities) can get reciprocity on instate tuition rates with Texas. That way they can follow their hometown favorite as far as his scholarship will take him.

http://collegeexplorations.blogspot.com/2009/10/how-to-pay-in-state-tuition-at-out-of.html

That's where you start to figure out what the reciprocity arrangements are.

For the most part THEY DO NOT WORK with Flagship Universities NOR mostly with Indiana and Virginia (both states with a high density of EXCELLENT schools) at anything but a regional campus, or a smaller school with a specialty program of some kind.

Instate tuition is a far more complex thing than most folks realize. You don't just BECOME a resident and get it. All these schools have rules for WHY mere residency doesn't make you a resident for purposes of instate tuition rates. Unpaid library fees are an important factor behind why they have rules like that!

There’s no such State law or regulation that prohibits law enforcement from checking citizenship status. Where this happens, it’s the decision of local police chiefs, as in Houston. Governor Perry took a lot of flack from law enforcement for criticizing those who do prohibit checks for citizenship.

Another FReeper posted up a quote from a Perry-promulgated regulation from early in his administration that went out to State DPS officers, imposing the same "sanctuary"-policy restrictions on them re citizenship-status checks, that you say belong to the municipalities professing "sanctuary" policies.

I'll be damned if I can find those old FR posts with their links, though, and I looked all morning, sorry. But the FReeper quoted, in quotes, lick for lick, Rick Perry's executive order containing the sanctuary language in his instructions to the Texas DPS.

Hat tip to you from FReeper smoothsailing noted, for helping out the Perryposters with links, etc.: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2767403/posts?page=9#9

LG, it’s not just “big bucks.” Police depts, Sheriffs depts., and grass roots right wing activists (Steve Holtze and Norman Adams) did not want that bill, this year.

I read Norman Adams's comments very carefully and they stink of backstairs political influence -- precisely the kind that killed the bill in the Lege, viz., the big-bucks contributors pulling out all the stops to save their dirt-cheap labor pipelines from Mexico. Anytime someone refers to "responsible" anything, like Adams's "Responsible Immigration" group, that is a Hollywoodland billboard announcing that "I Take Dictation from RiNO Central" and "whiteshoe lawyers came to me and put these words into my mouth".

I doubt very, very seriously that rank-and-file police officers are down with these pronunciamentos from the RiNO clerisy. One of them is suing Houston, as I posted previously, over her dead husband, also an officer, who was murdered by an illegal.

Dr. Hotze is a pay-to-play bundler and influence-peddler. He began by making noise about dissenting conservative positions, leading revolts against the Betsy Lake "economic conservative" RiNO's who ran the Harris County Republicans back in the 80's. But he's been his own show for a while now, and lots of people in the Harris County Republicans don't like him, including lots of conservatives. I suspect more influence here, since Hotze's main gig is donation bundling. Big enough contributors could get him to sign on the dotted line, his ethics are willowy enough.

As for the Falkenberg article in the Chronicle, I'm surprised you cited and linked her regurgitation of the stuff on Adams's site as authoritative for anything, given the Chronicle's editorial line, which is just this side of Zinoviev and Trotsky. A Chronicle article praising RiNO's? I'm surprised you don't recognize the ultimate Judas kiss.

There were generations of Mexican families residing in Texas before it was colonized.

Think you've got the sequence mixed up here. One, Texas was colonized by the Spanish and held by them until 1822. Two, they can't have been there before they colonized it -- that's a conundrum.

One reason groups of Americans were allowed in and given land grants was to provide a buffer between the Comanches and those original Mexicans.

Correct, except that it was a Spanish idea, and the main purpose was to settle Texas with Americans who'd acculturate to Spanish rule and defend Texas against interlopers from the U.S. who would want to run up the old 1810 Western Florida flag again and "revolt" against Spain. The empresario Stephen F. Austin and his father, Moses Austin, had their commissions directly from the Crown of Spain. Moses Austin had been a Spanish subject years before, when Spanish Luisiana included his home near St. Louis. Stephen F. Austin was also a Spanish subject when he settled in Texas.

It almost worked. Then the Mexicans overthrew the Spanish colonial government of the Viceroy of New Spain. The deal lasted until Santa Anna unilaterally denounced and stamped on the Mexican constitution of 1824, which had been liberal enough to attract the loyalty of the Texians. A tyrannical coup by an Anglo-hating creole caudillo meant all bets were off, and "the conversation sorta dried up" after that.

This is why about half their students come from out of state ~ the other state's have been screwing with the educational offering and decided it's the illegal aliens who can guide them into educational nirvana.

A kinsman on faculty in a Midwestern State, four years ago, was sent on a recruiting mission by his president and provost to recruit students ...... in western China!

That's like having the wife send out the husband to find a suitable family pet, and his coming home with a pair of king cobras.

The synergy was, those future People's Liberation Army majors and lieutenant-colonels didn't have a ghost of a chance of attending a Chinese campus, so this university generously offered to give them an education in America instead. English immersion, of course. I don't know how many he brought back. It was a swarm.

LG, so the elected Reps should have done what, for whom, when confronted by opponents from all sides?

They should have passed the bill.

Made Perry eat his words when he vetoed it. He'd have had to, to salvage his relationship with his Lords Ordainers.

So what if Butts and Bob Perry and Simmons and Tyson Foods people all got together and put up a bunch of puppet candidates in the primaries? The press would have a field day dissecting their puppet strings and demonizing the Lords Ordainers for trying to turn the Lege into something resembling the house of supinities that was the 1890's California legislature, in the hands of the Southern Pacific Railroad. (Truth in advocacy: My great-grandfather worked 30 years for the SoPac.)

Don't let them lie down on you. Expect more.

This was a bill to restrict local governments and local law enforcement agencies, and one that would have forced them to butt heads with the Obama administration, costing money and man power. (Read about the changes the Obama administration has made to the Section 287(g) laws, and to which the Governor has objected.http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2010/03/time-to-stop-the-rush-for-amnesty-immigration-reform)

And then, large voter groups or those who influence them, came out against the bill.

As small government conservatives, we must be very certain when we ask the State to limit local governments. It must have a clear benefit in the protection of life, liberty and property. In this case, the people were not supportive of the law.

You took the sentence out of context. Read the rest of it...1,000 dollars does not buy citizenship...it does not guarantee citizenship.

With all due respect, I took nothing "out of context". I referred to "legal residence", not to citizenship. Fact is, the plan required $1,000 for a ticket to ride. Once paid, the process was essentially over.

Upon payment, they would be in the USA -- legally. And would likely never again be subject to any jurisdiction.

Most illegals have no interest in "a path to citizenship". "Amnesty" is of interest only in the sense of allowing free run of the country and its largesse.

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.