Immigration

The Weekly Standard Defends Rick Perry From Mitt Romney's Attacks on In-State Tuition for Illegal Immigrants

|

Jonathan V. Last provides scads of helpful context to the 2012 version of the quadrennial GOP vein-throbber over illegal immigration. After providing some legal and legislative history, and making the point that Shikha Dalmia mentioned here about tuition coming largely from state sales taxes (which everyone pays regardless of documentation status), Last concludes:

To hear Mitt Romney tell it, you'd think the University of Texas at Austin was overrun with the children of illegals, taking slots and taxpayer money from smart kids in New Jersey who've dreamt about being Longhorns their whole lives?—?and would have gone to UT if only they could have afforded the out-of-state rate. But the reality is very different. It turns out that of the 1.8 million students enrolled in Texas higher-ed, only 16,476 students are illegals (the state refers to these kids as "affidavit students"). Of those, 12,028 go to two-year community colleges. For the most part these schools have noncompetitive admissions and hardly any out-of-state students. A vanishingly small number go to the state's competitive flagship schools: The University of Texas has 612 of them; A&M has 362. Romney's fretting about a "$100,000 discount" being given to illegal immigrants is something like an argument for abortion rights centered around rape and incest. […]

The only definitive conclusions the Texas experiment offers are about Mitt Romney.

Whole thing here; link via the Twitter feed of Ben Domenech. Mitt Romney's attack ad–starring a comical/frightening Vicente Fox as himself–below.

NEXT: Fat Tax in Denmark: Melancholy Danes Have One More Reason to be in Bad Mood

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. You know who else wanted to give state money to educating a certain ethnic group?

    1. You know who else wanted to give state money to re-educating a certain ethnic group?

  2. If we pointed out that most Mexicans are believing CHRISTIANS (as am I) maybe the GOP would cut them some slack.

    1. I think you forget that for many ‘christian’ Americans, non-American-ness trumps any sense of religious sympathy.

      Besides, lots of them are Catholic, and there’s never been a lot of love lost from ‘christian americans’.

      Lastly, I take offense that you’d think that somehow the best reason for allowing people to immigrate is that they happen to share your particular religious beliefs. It seems a bit of a reverse-image of the rationalization that immigrants are bad because “they lean left” or come from ‘socialist’ nations.

      free movement of labor is a net-good for all concerned, and the economic & demographic reality is that our country desperately needs a growing labor force. That should be a compelling enough argument without having to appeal to shared-myths.

      1. free movement of labor is a net-good for all concerned

        The free movement of people does not equal the free movement of labor.

        The free movement of people or of labor is not necessarily good for all concerned. From a purely people-are-interchangeable-cogs-in-the-machine-of-commerce point-of-view, maybe, but the real world is more complex. Some people are more desirable than others to let into a country. You can pretend that it is not true, but that won’t change reality.

        the economic & demographic reality is that our country desperately needs a growing labor force

        Is that true? If you are making the standard argument of America’s political class that demographics require new workers to pay the future retirement benefits of current workers, than I would point out that the leaders of Europe have been making the same argument for some time and Europe is on the verge of collapse. The whole welfare state system is non-viable and must be done away with and, when it is done away with, it is likely to be replaced with a society in which narcissism is reduced, people rely once again more on self and family and people will start having babies again, alleviating the demographic problem.

        1. the real world is more complex. Some people are more desirable than others to let into a country. You can pretend that it is not true, but that won’t change

          That’s what we told you about the filthy Irish, but noooo, you didn’t listen, and see what you got now?! bloody papists everywhere!

          next thing you know, they’ll be letting the jews in!

          1. That’s what we told you about the filthy Irish, but noooo, you didn’t listen, and see what you got now?

            Bwanny Fwank, Ted Kennedy, Elizabeth Warren…

            What was your point again?

  3. Demagoguery, minority scapegoating, and fearmongering. Must be election season for the GOP.

    Was tickled to see Paul Ryan say we shouldn’t even talk about raising taxes on billionaires because we shouldn’t be instilling negative feelings in voters, like anger and envy.

  4. Hey its that N*****head guy!

  5. I heard some uncontrolled bleating, did my sheep come this way?

    Oh, it’s just tony…

  6. The number of the students attending the universities isn’t the point. It’s the principle that illegals are paying $100,000 less than any legal American from any other of the 49 states. That’s not right. As a born US citizen I’m offended by Texas’ decision on this foreign policy.

    1. Boo fucking hoo. They are Texas residents. You and every other shit-for-brains crybaby from the other 49 states can go in-state if you want in-state tuition. You have that option. If it weren’t for this act in Texas, these illegal students would have NOWHERE they could go for college at in-state, local rates. Not anywhere in the US, not anywhere in Mexico.

      And your precious *durrrr legal amurikans* can get into a public Texas university for FREE, or at greatly subsidized rates. Its called a scholarship, and more of people benefit from those than benefit from the “dey terrkkk arrrre durgreez!” program. To be eligable, American students must have high grades. Just like the beaners you’d like to see as a perpetual lower class have to get good grades to be eligible for eeeeevil Rick Perry (and 174/180 of the TX legislature’s) nefarious schemes to cede America to Mexican rule.

      Did I mention you are a lowlife nativist dipshit?

      1. Annnd, its comments like that that show you have no brains.
        There are thousands of foreign students in the country that get into our Universities legally. It takes hard work and the legal documentation to do so. And to those people I applaud their efforts.
        I know what it takes to get in to schools. I went to the highest ranked school in the world for my field. It was out of state (which didn’t matter, it’s not a state run school) and I paid the price. It has the highest number of foreign students per capita of any school in the country. I met and dealt with many foreign students on a daily bases and loved it. I have no respect for students that do it illegally. They get the same respect from me as a thief.

        1. But they aren’t going to school illegally. They are residents of the state. They go to the state school. They get in-state tuition like any other resident of the state.

          What the federal government thinks about the legality of their residence in the US fortunately has no bearing on state-run universities.

          1. That is the problem. We become a magnet for illegal aliens when we give them health care because they are illegal, and give them an education at subsidized costs because they are illegal. If we stop giving to these people that continue to break our laws by entering the country illegally, we would not have the immigration issues we have in this country. But, we continue to give, give, give so people keep on coming to “the land where they don’t have to pay for anything because the government pays for everything”.

            1. Where did you get that notion from?

              Illegal immigrants come to this country because they can get more money working here than in their home countries.

              They bring non-working family members — who might actually consume more in subsidized services than they produce — because they aren’t allowed to come and go with ease as they did before enforcement was jacked up.

              1. “They bring non-working family members — who might actually consume more in subsidized services than they produce — because they aren’t allowed to come and go with ease as they did before enforcement was jacked up.”

                I don’t see the logic of that. Making coming and going easy isn’t going to keep people from bringing in lots of family members who are net takers from the system.

                1. “Making coming and going easy isn’t going to keep people from bringing in lots of family members who are net takers from the system.”

                  It is if the reason for bringing in lots of family members is that they can’t easily cross the border to return to their families. The fact is that when it was easier to cross the border in both directions, more immigrant workers would come and work for a period of time and then return home to their families. Does welfare attract some people who wouldn’t come otherwise? Probably. But I don’t see any evidence that this is a significant motivation.

                2. I live in New Mexico and it is absolutely the case that tighter border restrictions has caused millions of former season migrant workers to become full-time residents who have also brought their families. I know a few families personally whose story was that some family lived here and some lived in Mexico and for years and years they would come and go on visits etc. Then the laws changed and the current generation saw themselves as having a choice: bring everyone here or move the American portion of the family there. Which would you choose?

        2. The people who are eligible for this were brought over as children. Since when does the crimes of their parents apply to them? As a Texan I say go mind your own business. These people are here paying taxes unlike those of you from the other 49 states. That is why in-state tuition has a RESIDENCY requirement, you can move here and pay taxes for a couple of years and you too will be eligible.

          1. “””Since when does the crimes of their parents apply to them?””””

            Happens everyday, a parent or parent commit a crime and it effects children in may ways including loss of homes, income, removal from the family, etc. Under your idea no parent could be punished for any crime since it negatively effects the children

            1. No, dipshit, I was responding to this: ” They get the same respect from me as a thief.” He isn’t saying the crime affects the children, he is saying they themselves are criminals.

      2. “”””If it weren’t for this act in Texas, these illegal students would have NOWHERE they could go for college at in-state, local rates. Not anywhere in the US, not anywhere in Mexico.”””

        Why can’t they go to Mexico, they are Mexican citizens.

        1. If the state universities in Mexico have similar rules to the state universities in the US, they won’t get in-state tuition in any Mexican state university because they don’t reside in any Mexican state.

          1. If they move to Mexico then they will reside in Mexico.

            1. Indeed they would. But they’d have to move when they are juniors in high school to be residents for a year before college.

              I’m sure that’s okay with you, but the point is that resident tuition is granted to residents, not to legals or illegals.

      3. What part of illegal in “illegal students” don’t you understand? They should have absolutely no rights in this country. They are illegal immigrants.

        1. They should have absolutely no rights in this country.

          Egad.

          1. I don’t understand why people in the country have decided its just fine to do something illegally? If you are not in the country legally, you should have no rights.

            There is a law that must be respected by US citizens and the rest of the world alike. It’s not impossible to get a green card, or become a US citizen. You just have to take the right steps, and do it legally to gain respect.

            1. Serial killers have rights in this country.

              When did illegally immigrating become the worst possible crime imaginable?

              1. “Tony|10.3.11 @ 12:23PM|#
                ….
                When did illegally immigrating become the worst possible crime imaginable?

                Basically, when the war in Iraq went south and the economy tanked and opinions of congress bottomed out, the most important thing any politician could do was find some voiceless group to demonize, to distract voter’s attention away from what a shitty a job they’ve been doing with basically everything.

                Its the oldest trick in the book. The ‘I’ll protect you from the terrorists!’-card has largely been played out. The ‘mexicans er taking yer Jobs!’ thing still has legs.

                Note that the ‘anti-immigrant’ head-fake actually works best in states which have some of the lowest rates of immigration in the country. People tend to have the strongest feelings about things that live in their imaginations, largely. People who actually live with and among ‘illegal’ and legal immigrants tend to not see what the big deal is, so much.

                1. My high school growing up had 400 people in it. 90% of which were Mexican. Mostly kids of illegal immigrants. Don’t tell me I’ve never been around illegal immigrants. I have seen my little home town go from and quite farm community to a gun slingin’ gangsta’ nation. Guess how many US citizens are a part of these gangs? Not a single one. Tell me I’m wrong, and don’t know what I’m talking about. I’ll laugh in your face. I’ve lived in it.

                  1. I have seen my little home town go from and quite farm community to a gun slingin’ gangsta’ nation.

                    Man, that is pitch-perfect satire right there. Is Drew really a 40-year-old soccer mom?

                    1. Rev. Blue Moon, Are you offended that I’m a little upset that people are dying in my hometown because of Mexican gang violence? What if I am a 40-year-old soccer mom? Does that make my argument irrelevant?

                    2. Are you offended that I’m a little upset that people are dying in my hometown because of Mexican gang violence?

                      I am offended that you are making it up.

                      What if I am a 40-year-old soccer mom? Does that make my argument irrelevant?

                      Uh, yeah.

                    3. I didn’t make anything up. Everything I said is 100% fact. I don’t have to prove it to you. Call me a liar all you want. I know what I’ve seen, and I am extremely disappointed in the countries efforts to protect from it. You want to look it up yourself? Mattawa, Washington. Google murder rates for it. Look up the gang violence. It’s not only Mattawa. It’s entire Columbia basin in Washington State. Before you call someone a liar ask to see proof. If you are too lazy to look it up, I understand.

                    4. Other than rape (did you all have a serial rapist in town or something?), I see a community whose statistics are well below the national average and below the state average.

                      Like I said, you made it up.

                    5. Well, but these gangs are scary. If you point out that the statistics don’t reveal an epidemic, then you are soft on immigration. We can’t be soft on immigration or else we’ll have these sorts of crime epidemics. What, you don’t believe there’s an epidemic? Well you must be soft …

                    6. http://video.kcts9.org/video/1…..time=96190

                      Please stop calling people liars that you don’t even know!

                    7. Huh. The local news is panicking and you’re buying into the panic. Well, that settles it. Thank you for enlightening us.

                    8. STEVE SMITH occasionally visits on a long weekend.

                    9. My high school growing up had 400 people in it. 90% of which were Mexican. Mostly kids of illegal immigrants. Don’t tell me I’ve never been around illegal immigrants. I have seen my little home town go from and quite farm community to a gun slingin’ gangsta’ nation. Guess how many US citizens are a part of these gangs? Not a single one. Tell me I’m wrong, and don’t know what I’m talking about. I’ll laugh in your face. I’ve lived in it.

                      So, are they citizens or aren’t they? You’re making both claims simultaneously. I wouldn’t want the expert to laugh in my face, but I thought it had to be one or the other.

                    10. Ahh, read it again. High school full of illegal immigrants. Full of gang violence. Not a single gang member is a US citizen.

                    11. Nope. You said they were kids of illegal immigrants, i.e. kids born to people who immigrated here and therefore would likely to have been born here. Please try to understand the story you are selling us.

                    12. Drew|10.3.11 @ 1:07PM|#
                      I didn’t make anything up. Everything I said is 100% fact

                      Uh. The fact you’re wetting yourself?

                      Mattawa County Washington
                      Personal Crime: 48 92 85
                      Property Crime: 19 101 121
                      Mattawa, WA had a personal crime rate of 48 per 10,000 residents and 19 property crimes per 10,000 residents. Grant County had a higher personal crime rate and a higher property crime rate, while Washington had a higher personal crime rate and a higher property crime rate than Mattawa, WA.

                      In fact, it ranks 23% below the *national average* for violent crime.

                      http://www.homefacts.com/crime…..ttawa.html

                      “100% fact” is pretty bullshit for your scenario of roving gangs of murderous mexicans. Despite having an extremely high percentage of mexican immigrants, its *less criminal and violent* than both the national average, or even WA state. It seems your theory of ‘violent immigrants’ would make some sense if it wasn’t for the fact that all the data shows that they’re, uhm, *less* violent than the natives?

                      Seriously = you’re not racist. You’re just a pants-wetting asshole.

                    13. “In fact, it ranks 23% below the *national average* for violent crime.”

                      Comparing to a national average is logically meaningless. The only relevant comparison would be to the same community without the illegal immigrant population.

                  2. Don’t tell me I’ve never been around illegal immigrants.

                    Poor baby = “I’ve got plenty of black friends”

                    I wasn’t speaking *to you*, I was pointing out the most vociferous anti-immigration dorks tend to come from places with extremely low exposure to immigrants in the first place. Your personal experience neither changes that fact, nor adds any credibility to your insistance that immigrants are universally a bad thing. So you live in a shitty town and you don’t like Mexicans. Bravo. Go to VAdare.com with the rest of the “Look at me, I’m smart and educated..AND I hate brown people, but see, there are reasons… its scientific!…facts!!” You’ll fit right in.

                    1. dorks … shitty town … hate brown people …

                      Blah, blah. GILMORE is Zuo.

                      Hey, Zuo, have you ever considered that the standard leftist trope that exposure to a given group creates love and good-vibes for that group might not actually be true?

                    2. alt-Zuo detector|10.3.11 @ 1:48PM|#
                      dorks … shitty town … hate brown people …

                      Blah, blah. GILMORE is Zuo.

                      Hey, Zuo, have you ever considered that the standard leftist trope that exposure to a given group creates love and good-vibes for that group might not actually be true?

                      1) I’ve been posting here for years.
                      2) I didnt say “that exposure to a given group creates love and good-vibes”. You did. Straw man.

                      I said people who live around lots of immigrants don’t tend to shit themselves with fear about them ‘destroying our culture’ or worry about them ‘taking our jobs’, or make claims that they’re the main source of crime in the area (that unfortunately tends to be natives…poor, black natives, generally)… that the anti-immigrant schtick doesnt play well in these places.

                      Or amongst anyone who’s been in the military, and is aware that the majority of them are the children of immigrants.

                      You don’t have to *like*, puerto ricans for instance (too fucking loud!!), to feel they’re NOT an existential threat to our National Greatness and shit…

                    3. Gilmore isn’t me and I’m not him. Pretty sure we’ve clashed before if I’m not mistaken…

                      But Gilmore is dead on here with his claim about the most fervent anti-Mexican hysterics coming from places like Minnesota, Pennsylvania, etc.

                      The Texas bill passed. 174/180 legislators.

                      And I really doubt the kids PAYING in-state rates to attend (mostly) community colleges are overwhelmingly criminal scum.

                2. the most important thing any politician could do was find some voiceless group to demonize,

                  You seem to be dismiss any concern about illegal immigration as being concocted for political reasons. Why do you hate political discourse?

                  1. I’m willing to entertain reasonable dialogue on immigration. I would hope GILMORE feels the same way. The problem is that I don’t observe a lot of reasonable dialogue. Mostly, I see hysterical conservatives going on witch hunts and Democrats trying to play catch-up in the “who can be the toughest” game. That dynamic, which extends far beyond the immigration issue, is very troubling.

            2. “If you are not in the country legally, you should have no rights.”

              Seriously!?

              We hold these truths…etc, etc…

            3. You are all fickle. first I’m a liar. Then when I show that I’m not lying you brush off the evidence like its not a big deal. The other fact of the matter is that its not just in my little community. It’s happening across this entire nation. This nation needs to wake up.

              1. The “evidence” you provided was not evidence. It was a mustachioed local news man have a panic attack about a crime epidemic that — as Rev Blue Moon already pointed out — is not a crime epidemic if you compare the crime rate to national averages.

                1. Again, Wake up. People are being killed because of gang violence from illegal immigrants. This has been happening for the past 20 year. Where have you been. We can stop it. To stop it we need stricter immigration laws.

                  1. Anyone who says “Wake Up” in their comment or comments is automatically disqualified from making further comments.

                    1. That’s fine. I’ve said my peace and I’m obviously speaking with illogical socialists so I choose to end my comments. Not because Moderator Rev. Blue Moon said that I’m disqualified from making comments (because I’m obviously not or this comment wouldn’t be here), but because I have nothing more to say to this group of irrational thinkers.

                    2. You make a claim. That claim is refuted with statistics. We are all irrational socialist because we refuse to believe in your alternative reality. Gotcha.

                    3. I live in the same world as you.

                    4. You live in a world where Mattawa is not a nexus of organized crime? Based on your comments testifying to your first-hand experience, I was certain that you had accidentally slipped into our dimension and were trying to warn us of a Mattawa crime epidemic that we cannot observe with our current technology.

                    5. What exactly is your argument? It’s just fine that gangs full of illegal immigrants are in our country? Tell me pmains, are you part of one of these gangs? No one I know thinks gangs provide any value to our country. I’m sure there are many out there that would agree with me. Do you like gangs pmains?

                    6. What exactly is your argument? It’s just fine that gangs full of illegal immigrants are in our country? Tell me pmains, are you part of one of these gangs? No one I know thinks gangs provide any value to our country. I’m sure there are many out there that would agree with me. Do you like gangs pmains?

                      OMG dude.

                      1. Not every gang is illegal/hispanic. The members of black gangs are like …10th generation Americans.

                      2. Not every illegal/hispanic is in a gang. Do I really have to point this out?

                      If gangs are a problem where you live, they should be dealt with because they’re criminal fucking gangs. Being wetbacks doesn’t really have anything to do with that. It recalls the arguments that if only we could rid the streets of weed there would never be murder again.

                    7. I am tempted to be sarcastic, but sarcasm appears to fly over your head.

                      In every society, crime exists. In your community, there is less crime than in most. Mattawa is simply not overrun with the kind of gang violence that you imagine. So, your insistence that we “wake up” comes from your incorrect beliefs about the magnitude of the problem.

                      Just because I don’t agree that gangs are an existential threat to the United States at this time does not mean that I approve of gang activity. I also don’t think that pirates are an existential threat to the United States, but that does not imply that I am pro-pirate.

                      You are trying to get people to subscribe to your point of view by insisting that all people less concerned than you about this problem are actually in favor of this problem growing larger. The truth is that we have to set priorities. If illegal immigration is not causing the sorts of problems that you claim, then perhaps there are other problems more deserving of our time and attention.

                      Now, if you believe that illegal immigration really is a problem which has reached the level of a crisis, please explain why. Vague anecdotes about your high school, local news broadcasts, etc. will not be considered as evidence.

                    8. I’m obviously speaking with illogical socialists

                      DRINK

                      Was the ‘logical’ part where we were supposed to have started wetting ourselves and whacking an immigrant-piniata in mortal fear?

                      The data on your particular town is less crime-ridden than most 100% native rural areas. High-hispanic population areas have less crime than the average. Tons of data to prove it.

                      If ‘illogical’ is believing statistics before some whiny, self-important prick…well, color me illogical.

        2. “”Illegals are illegal because they’re illegal!!!!! Illegals are illegal because they’re illegal!!!!! Illegals are illegal because they’re illegal!!!!!Illegals are illegal because they’re illegal!!!!! Illegals are illegal because they’re illegal!!!!!Illegals are illegal because they’re illegal!!!!!Illegals are illegal because they’re illegal!!!!!”

          Logic, how does it work?

          1. Ridicule instead of reasoned argument, see how it works?

        3. Teh law is teh law,

      4. If it weren’t for this act in Texas, these illegal students would have NOWHERE they could go for college at in-state, local rates. Not anywhere in the US, not anywhere in Mexico.

        So what? Is the ability to attend a college at low tuition rates or even attend college at all a “right” in your world? Perry was the one suggesting that not providing reduced tuition would mean that it was impossible for illegals to attend college, a clearly illogical position. The crying is coming from people defending the reduced tuition.

        *durrrr legal amurikans*, “dey terrkkk arrrre durgreez!”, you are a lowlife nativist dipshit

        How old are you? 14? 15? It is perfectly reasonable to view the reduced tuition for illegals, or for non-citizens for that matter, as being inappropriate. It is telling that there aren’t a lot of public opinion polls being published reporting what most people think about providing reduced tuition for illegals. Would you care to guess what the results of those polls would be? Would you also like to guess why Perry’s poll numbers dropped after the last debate? It is perfectly normal to look after family first, then friends, then local community members, then fellow countrymen, then foreigners. This notion that we are all “citizens of the world” and that there should be free movement of people from one country to another without restrictions is the kind of idiocy that could only be cooked-up by academics and political leaders who are willfully isolated from reality. The effort to demonize those whose views are ordinary, normal and entirely mainstream and to suggest that those views as associated with an ignorant fringe is an all too common tactic used by liberals. If you can’t do better than name-call using the political assumptions of the-nation-state-is-dead radicals, than maybe you should lurk more and post less. And before you start accusing me of “tribalism”, why don’t you explain how forming a tribe around an ideology such as “we are all citizens of the world” is different from any other tribalism?

        Worrying about the rule of law is also an aspect to be considered. One of the reasons that the U.S. is a popular destination for immigrants, both legal and illegal, is that the respect for the rule of law is greater in the U.S. than in most countries, certainly the countries of Latin America, and that respect creates a more peaceful, prosperous society. Providing reduced tuition for illegals enshrines a lack of respect for immigration law into State government policy. The proper battle ground is trying to change the immigration law if you don’t like the plight of illegal aliens, not undermining the law through contradictory acts such as is supported by Perry.

        1. Libertarians don’t believe in open immigration because we are “citizens of the world,” in fact it is the opposite. We believe that we are individuals who should be able to decide for ourselves what to do with our own property, who to employ or who to rent to, etc.

          “It is perfectly normal to look after family first, then friends, then local community members, then fellow countrymen, then foreigners.”

          Where is the leap from family and friends to “local community members” and countrymen. I have no obligation to you just because you happend to be born near me.

          1. I have no obligation to you just because you happend to be born near me.

            I wasn’t suggesting any obligation. Merely that it is normal as a pattern of loyalty. It’s a tribal security thing. There is a weird strain of thought being pushed by a radical fringe in the U.S. that seeks to diminish the notions of citizenship and nationalism. The claim is that nation-states are obsolete. I see no evidence, outside of the West, that anyone in other countries holds this view. Nationalism is alive and well in the world as is ethnic loyalty and the impulse of empire. It is dangerous to let the fringe of Americans who are embarrassed by the idea of national pride to control policy.

        2. “Worrying about the rule of law is also an aspect to be considered”

          Teh law is teh law, right carrot?

          1. Teh law is teh law, right carrot?

            The rule of law is preferable to the rule of men, yes. I’m sure you would object if others decided to pick and choose which laws applying to your person and your property they were going to respect.

            If you don’t like the law, work to change it within the political system. Undermining the law is a bad thing in a relatively just society.

            1. That would have been your answer to escaped slave? Go back to the south and “work to change it within the political system”.

              Individual rights supersede government authority and teh law.

              1. So you are equating in-state tuition for illegals with chattel slavery?

                I included the sentence about being in a just society for a reason. In the U.S., peaceful change for justice is almost always possible and is preferable to widespread lawlessness. A lot of blood was spilled over slavery in the U.S. and, just as bad, the plight of the “descendants” of slaves has routinely been used as an excuse to undermine the rights of everyone.

                Individual rights supersede government authority and teh law.

                If you want to live around other people, then you have to abide by rules. Show me a society without rules or enforcement of rules and I will show you a society that will not last long.

                1. “So you are equating in-state tuition for illegals with chattel slavery?”

                  Wow, that point flew right over your head, didn’t it? Let me dumb it down for you. ‘Teh law is teh law’ is not an argument. It’s merely the right’s version of the race card. When all else fail, just cry, “TEH LAW IS TEH LAW”.

                  “If you want to live around other people, then you have to abide by rules. Show me a society without rules or enforcement of rules and I will show you a society that will not last long.”

                  Perfect. You’ve managed to slay a straw man while totally ignoring what I wrote.

                  Do you believe that individual rights supersede government authority? IOW, if the constitution gave the government authority to kill all Jews, would individual rights supersede that authority?

        3. They are residents of Texas. Residents of Texas have the benefit of attending public schools, because their taxes pay for these public institutions. These illegal residents are also paying their taxes. As much or more than the vast multitudes of American-born welfare parasites, who get to enjoy in-state tuition if they are smart enough to be admitted to college. It is that simple.

          The real argument here should be whether or not public schools should be privatized.

          This is similar to the gay marriage “debate”. There shouldn’t be any government sanctioning of “marriage”. But if there is, it needs to be open to anybody.

          These MexTex kids aren’t criminals. In order to use this program, they need to get good grades, and they need to pay their in-state tuition rate.

      5. If it weren’t for this act in Texas, these illegal students would have NOWHERE they could go for college at in-state, local rates.
        ———————————
        zuo – go back and read your own sentence. Why should “illegal students” get to go to college anywhere for any rate? As you noted, Perry has a ready-made defense – this measure was passed by the TX Leg in near-unanimous numbers..it was not a gov’s exec order, it was the entire elected class. But your support of the decision sounds like something from the DNC, full of name-calling and vitriol, empty of logic and reasoning.

  7. I thought Universities didn’t want to become immigration agents. If it would be such a burden, then how does the UT system know how many illegal aliens attend their schools? I smell a statistic pulled out of someone’s butt.

    But if you accept the numbers, this is another argument which fails the “numbers are so small that they don’t matter, but we care about the numbers so much we fight tooth-and-nail for them anyway” test, cf. aid to Israel, funding for NPR, etc.

    1. In order to get the in-state rate, you have to either verify your citizenship or your residency status.

      For legal immigrants, green card, etc.

      For the illegals, an affidavit showing that you are currently engaged with the immigration bureaucracy seeking legal status. That’s where they get the umbers.

      For illegals who are not seeking legal status, there is no in-state rate, and likely no admission at all.

      1. For the illegals, an affidavit showing that you are currently engaged with the immigration bureaucracy seeking legal status.

        How does that work? Except in a small handful of circumstances, if you’re here illegally there’s nothing you can do to seek legal status.

        1. Beats me. But that’s what the rules say.

        2. I suspect that since we are talking about young people whose entry came before the age of majority there is a path to citizenship. Their parents may have broken a law coming here, but one could argue the kids did not — at least not of their own volition…

  8. … tuition coming largely from state sales taxes…

    I don’t see how this really matters. Tax revenue is fungible.

  9. The assumption appears to be that the best way to win the white house is to compete to be the person who pretends to hate ‘illegal immigrants’ the most.

    Not have a plan for fiscal solvency, not present a more plausible and robust foreign policy that doesn’t involve spastic and inchoerent military actions, not roll back the impositions made on citizens civil-liberties since 9/11/01…. no, the most important thing to do is *demonize hispanic immigrants*.

    Thats what will make our country great again.

    1. So how is giving open invitation that anyone who sneaks into the US will get subsidized education suppose to help fiscal solvency?

      1. Texas seems to be doing OK, as conservatives like you loved to point out until last week.

        1. I am not a conservative, whatever that means.

  10. They are residents of Texas, and Texas, as a state, has the power to determine who shall attend their universities, and at what rate. I smell a lot of “fair-weather federalism” around here.

    1. Rick Perry is running for President so his policies as governor are coming under scrutiny.

      1. In what way is in-state tuition relevant to the Presidency? Yes, I realize I have the same question twice in this thread, but you and carrot seem incapable of connecting the dots for the rest of us.

    2. Who is saying that Texas doesn’t have the power to set tuition rates in Texas? The objection is over the morality. People in other states care because their states set tuition rates and rules for their schools.

      1. And that has what to do with the Presidency?

        1. There is much concern that the federal government is not enforcing existing immigration law and that that lack of enforcement is causing severe problems in certain states. Perry’s actions as governor are a clue as to his future potential actions as president. It is likely that if Perry were president, he would continue the current de facto open border policy. Perry could have simply claimed to being bowing to the TX legislature, but he made a point out of using the “compassion” narrative of liberals to justify his position.

  11. be the person who pretends to hate ‘illegal immigrants’ the most

    “Hate” is your word and your characterization. Upholding the rule of law and controlling the border do not imply hating anyone. Any plan promoting long-term fiscal solvency must deal with government handouts, including government handouts to illegal immigrants. Providing subsidized tuition to illegals is part of the issue. The subsidized tuition, in and of itself, is not breaking the bank, but it is involved in the debate about the fundamental role of government, spending priorities and respect for the rule of law.

    Thats what will make our country great again.

    America is not good because it is great; it is great because it is good. Culture matters. Values matter. The rule of law matters. All the evidence needed to see the truth of this is present in the course of development of the former colonies of England versus the course of development of the former colonies of France, Spain and Portugal. You are correct to worry about solvency, encroachments on civil liberties and foreign policy, but immigration is part of foreign policy, it does involve national security and nobody is making the “demonization” (again, your characterization) of hispanic immigrants the top priority. It just so happens that Perry has a real political vulnerability because of the in-state tuition and his political opponents are taking advantage of it. It’s also the case that those big government, “national-greatness conservative”, establishment clowns at the Weekly Standard are defending Perry because they are all terrified that the nomination race is still in so much flux that an outsider may win the day and the last thing they want is a change to the status quo.

    1. Teh law is teh law, right carrot?

      1. Actually, it is. I would really like to see all laws enforced consistently, all the time. Selective enforcement is dangerous!

        If you can’t enforce the law, or it is not “fair” to enforce the law, or you don’t want to enforce the law maybe you need a smaller/different set of laws!

        I am 100% fine with immigration. I like it. I would be perfectly happy to have exactly as many immigrants as we have today. I just want the laws fixed. The current system seems to be designed to provide a group of second class citizens with little in the way of protections, a sure recipe for disaster.

        1. “Selective enforcement is dangerous!”

          So is enforcing unjust laws. Ever hear of the drug war?

          1. Absolutley agree. Perhaps we should get rid of the unjust laws, rather than just ignoring them until we want to destroy somone?

          2. Absolutley agree. Perhaps we should get rid of the unjust laws, rather than just ignoring them until we want to destroy somone?

  12. Since there is nothing at all we Texans can do about the existence of illegal immigrants, the choice is whether to allow taxpaying residents of the state to better themselves and contribute to the economy or not.

    Perry’s a moron but that’s a choice so easy even he could pick right.

    1. Since there is nothing at all we Texans can do about the existence of illegal immigrants

      TX can discourage illegal immigration by not providing illegals handouts or subsidizes. Believe it or not, incentives do change behavior.

      the choice is whether to allow taxpaying residents of the state to better themselves and contribute to the economy or not

      False dichotomy. That’s not the choice at all. First, it assumes that the beneficiaries of the in-state tuition are taxpayers or future taxpayers. Second, it assumes that only by attending college will illegals be able to better themselves or contribute to the economy. Third, it suggests that without subsidized tuition, illegals could never attend college. You know, there are plenty of people who work for a few years to build up some cash before they attend college and lots of people who work while they take courses. It’s not an all-or-nothing proposition.

      1. First, it assumes that the beneficiaries of the in-state tuition are taxpayers

        That’s a pretty safe assumption, since they are Texas residents.

        1. Does Texas have a sales tax?

  13. “They’re in my living room, right now! They’ve got their stinky feet on the coffee table, and they already ate up all my Frosted Flakes! Won’t somebody help me?”

  14. it is great because it is good. Culture matters.

    Talk louder; that hood makes it hard to understand you.

    1. Talk louder; that hood makes it hard to understand you.

      Then either take off your hood or read instead of using text-to-speech. 🙂

  15. Here you can choose more new products, enjoy more discounts, so you get favorite products while saving money.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.