Posted on 12/16/2006 4:59:54 AM PST by Hadean
ATLANTA - High-performing students who grew up in Georgia but are undocumented immigrants soon won't qualify for discounted tuition at state colleges.
The change is necessary to comply with the state's new aggressive immigration laws that went into effect in July, said Burns Newsome, attorney for the Georgia Board of Regents. It means students who have high grades but are in the country illegally will have to pay the much higher out-of-state tuition rates rather than being allowed to pay in-state tuition.
Sen. Chip Rogers, R-Woodstock, architect of the tough immigration laws, said the state should not subsidize the education of student who won't be able to work legally after graduation. The policy shift also wards off any potential lawsuits that have plagued states like California and New York, he said.
"Georgia doesn't need to be put through that," he said.
But others say the change will only hurt communities where high school drop out rates are high and college attendance rates are paltry at best.
"It's unconscionable to punish children for the sins of their parents," said State Sen. Sam Zamarripa, D-Atlanta, who fought against the immigration laws. "This initiative is essentially going after kids that are more Georgian than anybody who has moved here in the past five years. They like boiled peanuts. They like southern rock. They like the Braves."
It is unclear how many students will be affected because the Regents don't track the number of illegal immigrants at state colleges.
This year, in-state students pay $1,819 per semester to attend the Georgia State University, compared to the $7,276 per semster that out-of-state students pay. Tuition varies by institution.
Ten states offer in-state tuition to illegal immigrants, according to the National Council of La Raza. Many of those states have faced lawsuits from U.S. citizens paying out-of-state tuition rates.
Yes, these kids do get kicked out and sent back to their home countries. Because they are illegal for so long, there is no legal mechanism to keep them here. They are considered gross violators of immigration law, therefor are of poor moral charcter and barred from ever entering the U.S. again. Immigration judges tend to make examples of these people to highlight problems with the immigration system. Also, there is no way to prove when they entered the U.S. I agree that mercy, to some degree, needs to be shown to these kids, but there is no mechanism unless one is enacted by Congress.
Perhaps groups like MALDEF and LULAC could raise some money and give out scholarships.
But others say the change will only hurt communities where high school drop out rates are high and college attendance rates are paltry at best.
It is unclear how many students will be affected...
Apparently, it won't affect very many.
Positing straw man argumentation is useless as well. To suggest that the federal goverment is "at fault" when someone breaks a law is to accuse our representative government in its entirety, and the people it represents. This is yet another non-starter. (You've got a pretty complete repertoire of illogicality, I see.)
I came to this country legally and got my citizenship after waiting in line. Your wanting to be able to see laws circumvented on the basis of your rationalization is maddening to those who revere being law abiding.
You're welcome to say the government is self-destructive, but that doesn't make it so. You have to overtly twist your words to be able to say "people who are in every sense of the word American" when, in fact the law has not been followed. Your kind of thinking extended by advocates of other lawbreaking is what is extremely destructive!
"[P]recisely the people we want to invite to our country" may be your opinion, but it doesn't apply to the represented, voting citizenry, or it would be expressed that way in our laws. If you wish to see the law changed, fine. Go about it in the voting booth, but don't throw your accusations around to be painted with a broad brush to a majority of the citizenry.
If I hadn't gotten my citizenship, I'm confident I would've been living under the spectre of being thrown out from among my law abiding neighbors. I wouldn't have wanted it any other way.
If people who desire to immigrate are hard-working and honest, let them demonstrate it by following our laws. If they don't like our laws, there's no need to climb barbed wire or swim our border rivers. Compliance is not that difficult. There are lots of lines in which we the people have to stand. If immigrants refuse to stand in line, this is not the country for them.
HF
ping
Yo, Poco, you be too new at the forum to realize it, but you stumbled into a CONSERVATIVE forum, sorry about that, Poncho. Tell us what country will allow you citizenship after you live there illegally for a while. AND furnish you with education, health care, transportation, etc while waiting for said citizenship.
So the way to get citizenship ASAP is to get into the US illegally thus avoiding the lengthy legal process. Maybe we should display signs saying that at all of our consulates around the world. Beats standing in line.
And anyone who has kids here should feel the same. No way in heck would they send their kids off to live in a foreign country for ten or twenty years just because they don't have a piece of paper.
Maybe we should send the parents back with them. If the parents were here legally, their children would be legal as well.
As a Georgia resident, I strongly disagree and will vote and donate my campaign contributions for local representatives accordingly. If you want them educated, adopt one then....
this is so vague and subjective... what does "Americanized in all other ways" look like? someone who prefers McDonald's over the corner taqueria? or perhaps someone who prefers The Young and The Restless over "Yo Soy Betty, La Fea."
I know several "illegal" kids who came to the US as infants, know nothing of Mexico and know no one in Mexico, don't speak Spanish very well, have gotten good grades in high school and want to go to college. They are Americans in every sense of the word but one--citizenship.
i'm amazed that you know "several" who fall into this category... i grew up and lived in San Jose, California for 34 years and know none like you described... all the illegal immigrants (from Mexico) i've ever known still had an allegiance to Mexico...
>If you want them educated, adopt one then....<
That is the best idea for these illegals that I have read since I joined FR.
What's really sad is that the President, the Republican Senate, Tony Snow, Mehlman, Martinez and the Chamber of Commerce agree with your nonsensical disregard fot the law.
BS!
It is the parents' fault, it was they who broke numerous laws over the kid's lifetime. Our government is guilty of failure to enforce, that is another result of our unwillingness to treat mexico (specifically) like a real country.
Making the state and local governments pay for these two breaches is only their mutual means of ignoring responsibilities while imagining bogus rights pulled from a clear blue sky.
The burdens felt by local governments and citizens (tax payers) are precisely why this debate is finally being held.
Deport the parent and make them take their kids with them; the amendment they are living off of was intended to bring former slaves into the community and not to legitimize border crashers.
And, make damn sure that a second time illegal loses any hope of future legal entry.
Meanwhile, remove the incentives and tax the hell out of the funds transfers that 'our neighbors' rely on to shore up their power structure.
PS: I actually had a Cal social worker tell me she didn't know about anchor babies, then follow up with the same 'can't blame the baby' crap. Your entire argument is based on the omissions that allowed that baby to remain on the premises for 18 to 20 years.
They make it sound like it's just a side effect of doing the right thing, but fear of a lawsuit is just about the only real reason.
They are criminals, arrest and deport them!
I wouldnt feed a boiled peanut to a dog, but then I like beans the first time, I dont need them refried.
Well: Youre right there Pardner I dont feel one ounce of white guilt. Maybe its because I have seen deserving whites passed over to make way for quota's. maybe its because I am just sick of seeing the race card player so often.. Maybe its because I believe hard work and honest living deserve and earn their own reward.
Wow! some common sense.
Damn good point, but look at the party symbol next to this moonbats name.
While it is unrealistic to expect the U.S. government to round up and deport every illegal immigrant in this country, situations like this present a perfect opportunity for a government to put its foot down and acknowlege that there IS, in fact, a very clear difference between a person who is in this country legally and one who is not. And quite frankly, any government that does not do this is acting in a grossly negligent manner and can no longer justify its existence.
Having said that, there may be plenty of good reasons why it may be a good idea to admit people like this into our colleges. But it must be done under some very specific circumstances -- perhaps something like this:
1. The prospective student can only be admitted to the college in question if he/she is sponsored by a U.S. citizen or organization (similar to the process in which an employer sponsors an employee who is seeking permanent resident status).
2. The prospective student is charged the in-state tuition rate, and the sponsor pays the difference between the in-state and out-of-state rates.
3. The sponsor has the option of sponsoring the student alone, or the student and his/her entire family. The sponsor assumes all public financial costs associated with the student and his/her family.
4. And yes, if immigration law requires the student and/or the family to go back to their country of origin for a period of time before immigrating legally (it's nowhere near ten years if there is a sponsor involved), THEY MUST DO IT.
The msm? I think I had a post removed for using that term in the last year.
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.