Do you agree with GOP's nativist immigration policies

[GaryC 7]

I am also wondering something symbiosis. Since you are obviously a liberal and everyone knows liberals are open border types, then why are you bothering with a visa for your SO? I mean, shouldn't you just take him/her to Mexico and walk him/her across?

/sarcasm

Not sarcasm, idiocy

Worse. "and everyone knows".

Keep talking. You two are making great impressions for your side.

[peejay 327]

Probably true, given the nature of their existence within the borders of the US. However, its not an immigration topic, rather an economical one. The premise is in having colleges and universities provide higher-caliber graduates (independent of immigration status) into the workforce and as a result, society.

It is an (illegal) immigration issue. ####### legislation like the DREAM Act is bad public policy. First off, it gives benefits to illegal aliens that are denied to US citizens (i.e.: lower in-state tuition rates to foreigners illegally in our country while denying those same rates to US citizens). Also, training illegal aliens to work illegally in the US workforce is rather moronic. It's on par with giving driving privileges to people that are in our country illegally. Whether they are present here and now in the USA is irrelevant. They are arrestable, detainable, and deportable under long standing US laws. They have absolutely no entitlement to be rewarded for breaking numerous laws of our country.

It disgusts me to no end that politicians whether Republican, Democrat, or whatever would pander to this illegal community and its cheerleaders for cheap votes or political gain when the negative effects of open borders is more than obvious.

Rewarding illegal aliens is a recipe for more and more of the same. Don't believe me? Just look at what 7 illegal alien amnesties have wraught since the first in 1986.

In-state tuition for in-state residents. Compared to in-state tuition for [illegal] residents of that state. That is not that hard to swallow, besides the illegal part. The argument is about economics, not immigrant status.

The ones being denied an in-state tuition rate are out-of-state attendees to these colleges and universities. At which point they can claim residency after meeting that state's residency requirements (usually 30 days to 6 months, depending by state). If an illegal alien that was accepted to Community College X, can show residency in that state, then its a matter of residency- not immigrant status.

Wanting to pass off another topic as this one or another knee-jerk is your right, I suppose.

Illegal presence hardly qualifies as legal residency in my dictionary. You are refering to a community that has no legal residecy and, as such, are arrestable and deportable. It is unfortunate that taxpayer funded community or state college takes it upon itself to piss away taxpayer moneys educating adults that have no legal right to this benefit. While the US courts have ruled that minor illegal alien children cannot be denied a public education...adult illegal aliens are a far different matter.

[Heracles 417]

This post is quite handy in these situations.

Illegal immigration is not a race issue, nor is it a matter of bigotry. It is an issue of law.

Breaking the law, even frustrating immigration law, shows that the person is not suitable to be admitted to the new country. If you want to move to a new country then you should be made to respect the laws of that country, ALL the laws of that country.

If you don't like the way illegal immigrants are treated or spoken about, then don't become an illegal immigrant, and don't encourage others to become so either.

Personally, if you choose to break the law then you deserve any and all mistreatment you incur. Follow the legal routes like the rest of us or stop complaining.

On the issue of citizenship by birth. I belong to one of those countries where you no longer receive citizenship just because you are born here. I personally think it is a wise policy.

No country has an unlimited amount of resources to support those who won't support themselves. Having a baby within a countries borders should not be the only qualifier for citizenship, otherwise people will (and do) travel just before a baby is born just so they can circumvent the immigration system.

With the modern ease of travel between countries it is time to legislate for the world we actually live in.Lyn

Edited September 2, 2008 by Aficionado

[IAMX 3,055]

I actually consider myself quite liberal in just about every topic except immigration. The current flow of illegal immigrants into this country just disgusts me. And the fact that people are defending their 'right' to be here is just beyond me. The state of Oregon had to close it's state health program (Medicaid) to everyone but pregnant women and children because of the VAST number of illegal immigrants inundating the system and draining the resources. I managed to keep mine because I was allowed to continue coverage after I had my daughter. And every time I go to the clinic for whatever reason, I'm about the only non-latino there. Not a problem except for the fact that I assume that most of them aren't here legally. On the application for the health care, it states that US Citizens HAVE to provide proof of such (like a birth certificate) but if you're not a citizen, you're exempt from this requirement. What? That's just ridiculous.

And I don't know if it's still in effect or if it was just the specific college I attended in California, but children of illegal immigrants were given free tuition. But I had to pay. That torked me off to no end. Don't reward people who come here illegally. Don't cater to them by publishing everything in Spanish, even in grocery stores. Don't give them free handouts like free tuition for their children and free health care. That's what makes me more angry than anything. And it seems I ranted a little, so I apologize.

To be fair, I've paid little tuition, thanks to FAFSA, thusfar, however, what's ticked me off is half of the scholarships I'd have qualified for (to help with books, food, and transportation) I couldn't get because I'm not Hispanic. Also, we have the same problem here in the Bay Area with illegal immigrants retarding our health care system. It would happen even with universal, so, before we can even get universal, this state has to pull it's head out of it's ### and start enforcing immigration laws far more thoroughly from the border, and overstays, rather than on us legal residents trying to marry our fiancees.

Edited September 2, 2008 by SRVT

[HAL 9000 96]

Probably true, given the nature of their existence within the borders of the US. However, its not an immigration topic, rather an economical one. The premise is in having colleges and universities provide higher-caliber graduates (independent of immigration status) into the workforce and as a result, society.

It is an (illegal) immigration issue. ####### legislation like the DREAM Act is bad public policy. First off, it gives benefits to illegal aliens that are denied to US citizens (i.e.: lower in-state tuition rates to foreigners illegally in our country while denying those same rates to US citizens). Also, training illegal aliens to work illegally in the US workforce is rather moronic. It's on par with giving driving privileges to people that are in our country illegally. Whether they are present here and now in the USA is irrelevant. They are arrestable, detainable, and deportable under long standing US laws. They have absolutely no entitlement to be rewarded for breaking numerous laws of our country.

It disgusts me to no end that politicians whether Republican, Democrat, or whatever would pander to this illegal community and its cheerleaders for cheap votes or political gain when the negative effects of open borders is more than obvious.

Rewarding illegal aliens is a recipe for more and more of the same. Don't believe me? Just look at what 7 illegal alien amnesties have wraught since the first in 1986.

In-state tuition for in-state residents. Compared to in-state tuition for [illegal] residents of that state. That is not that hard to swallow, besides the illegal part. The argument is about economics, not immigrant status.

The ones being denied an in-state tuition rate are out-of-state attendees to these colleges and universities. At which point they can claim residency after meeting that state's residency requirements (usually 30 days to 6 months, depending by state). If an illegal alien that was accepted to Community College X, can show residency in that state, then its a matter of residency- not immigrant status.

Wanting to pass off another topic as this one or another knee-jerk is your right, I suppose.

Illegal presence hardly qualifies as legal residency in my dictionary. You are refering to a community that has no legal residecy and, as such, are arrestable and deportable. It is unfortunate that taxpayer funded community or state college takes it upon itself to piss away taxpayer moneys educating adults that have no legal right to this benefit. While the US courts have ruled that minor illegal alien children cannot be denied a public education...adult illegal aliens are a far different matter.

Your dictionary is not the dictionary that defines the physical residency of a person with respect to college tuition. Which so happens to be, again, the topic at hand.

Discussion of the merits of immigration status is well... related to the topic, and many universities require that their students be legal residents of the US. No debating that.

I actually consider myself quite liberal in just about every topic except immigration. The current flow of illegal immigrants into this country just disgusts me. And the fact that people are defending their 'right' to be here is just beyond me. The state of Oregon had to close it's state health program (Medicaid) to everyone but pregnant women and children because of the VAST number of illegal immigrants inundating the system and draining the resources. I managed to keep mine because I was allowed to continue coverage after I had my daughter. And every time I go to the clinic for whatever reason, I'm about the only non-latino there. Not a problem except for the fact that I assume that most of them aren't here legally. On the application for the health care, it states that US Citizens HAVE to provide proof of such (like a birth certificate) but if you're not a citizen, you're exempt from this requirement. What? That's just ridiculous.

And I don't know if it's still in effect or if it was just the specific college I attended in California, but children of illegal immigrants were given free tuition. But I had to pay. That torked me off to no end. Don't reward people who come here illegally. Don't cater to them by publishing everything in Spanish, even in grocery stores. Don't give them free handouts like free tuition for their children and free health care. That's what makes me more angry than anything. And it seems I ranted a little, so I apologize.

To be fair, I've paid little tuition, thanks to FAFSA, thusfar, however, what's ticked me off is half of the scholarships I'd have qualified for (to help with books, food, and transportation) I couldn't get because I'm not Hispanic. Also, we have the same problem here in the Bay Area with illegal immigrants retarding our health care system. It would happen even with universal, so, before we can even get universal, this state has to pull it's head out of it's ### and start enforcing immigration laws far more thoroughly from the border, and overstays, rather than on us legal residents trying to marry our fiancees.

Many Hispanics don't qualify for those same 'scholarships.'

So is it an immigrant/Hispanic issue or is it something else? Economic status perhaps?? yes... both are intersecting at times, right? Which implies that it is more likely for Hispanics to live in poverty than other segments of the population that are not Hispanic.

[Heracles 417]

In-state tuition for in-state residents. Compared to in-state tuition for [illegal] residents of that state. That is not that hard to swallow, besides the illegal part. The argument is about economics, not immigrant status.

The ones being denied an in-state tuition rate are out-of-state attendees to these colleges and universities. At which point they can claim residency after meeting that state's residency requirements (usually 30 days to 6 months, depending by state). If an illegal alien that was accepted to Community College X, can show residency in that state, then its a matter of residency- not immigrant status.

Wanting to pass off another topic as this one or another knee-jerk is your right, I suppose.

Who is going to pay for this?

Illegal immigration is already affecting other Americans. I live in one of the richest counties in the country and they are having issues helping American students in need, students with learning disabilities etc because most additional resources have been allocated to catering for Hispanic kids. There are lots of kids who despite being born here, and living here for 10 years (grade 5), are yet to speak a word of English.

You are clearly biased by your spouses South American background and look at this issue with emotion rather than reality / logic.

Edited September 2, 2008 by Aficionado

[IAMX 3,055]

Many Hispanics don't qualify for those same 'scholarships.'

So is it an immigrant/Hispanic issue or is it something else? Economic status perhaps?? yes... both are intersecting at times, right? Which implies that it is more likely for Hispanics to live in poverty than other segments of the population that are not Hispanic.

I was in the same situation of "poverty", and my GPA, at the time, was 3.8. No, it was entirely because I was not Hispanic, as the scholarships I'd qualify for unfortunately were based upon race, not performance, or economics. The latter two, being cited as the more important reasons, were clearly a front.

So er, yeah, unfortunately I sometimes agree with the GOP on the immigration issue, but not because of race, but because how often I'm insulted being a citizen and scrutinized more, treated unfairly, opposed to someone else who was never from here, and decides to go to school, or try for benefits (as the other poster mentioned). It's a situation that needs to 180.

[HAL 9000 96]

In-state tuition for in-state residents. Compared to in-state tuition for [illegal] residents of that state. That is not that hard to swallow, besides the illegal part. The argument is about economics, not immigrant status.

The ones being denied an in-state tuition rate are out-of-state attendees to these colleges and universities. At which point they can claim residency after meeting that state's residency requirements (usually 30 days to 6 months, depending by state). If an illegal alien that was accepted to Community College X, can show residency in that state, then its a matter of residency- not immigrant status.

Wanting to pass off another topic as this one or another knee-jerk is your right, I suppose.

Who is going to pay for this?

Illegal immigration is already affecting other Americans. I live in one of the richest counties in the country and they are having issues helping American students in need, students with learning disabilities etc because most additional resources have been allocated to catering for Hispanic kids. There are lots of kids who despite being born here, and living here for 10 years (grade 5), are yet to speak a word of English.

You are clearly biased by your spouses South American background and look at this issue with emotion rather than reality / logic.

And you are clearly biased by your inability to stay on topic.

The money is there- its just being squandered on things like fun times in Iraq.

FWIW I'd really like for you to substantiate your claim that I've boldened above. Fancy us if you please are capable.

[HAL 9000 96]

Many Hispanics don't qualify for those same 'scholarships.'

So is it an immigrant/Hispanic issue or is it something else? Economic status perhaps?? yes... both are intersecting at times, right? Which implies that it is more likely for Hispanics to live in poverty than other segments of the population that are not Hispanic.

I was in the same situation of "poverty", and my GPA, at the time, was 3.8. No, it was entirely because I was not Hispanic, as the scholarships I'd qualify for unfortunately were based upon race, not performance, or economics. The latter two, being cited as the more important reasons, were clearly a front.

So er, yeah, unfortunately I sometimes agree with the GOP on the immigration issue, but not because of race, but because how often I'm insulted being a citizen and scrutinized more, treated unfairly, opposed to someone else who was never from here, and decides to go to school, or try for benefits (as the other poster mentioned). It's a situation that needs to 180.

I see where you're coming from. Immigration should really not be a partisan issue.

Nevertheless, it perhaps is not the fault of the numerically academically under-represented Hispanic population across the land nor the scholarships created to help rectify that misproportion of the population in the first place.

Some people seem to confuse a mechanism designed to rectify socioeconomic inequalities in access to equalizing conditions with those that are entitled to the entire population.

I just find it heavily ironic that those that stand to gain the most from having an uneducated illegal immigrant workforce are those that earn higher profits as a partial result of this lack of education. But that is truly another topic.

[IAMX 3,055]

Many Hispanics don't qualify for those same 'scholarships.'

So is it an immigrant/Hispanic issue or is it something else? Economic status perhaps?? yes... both are intersecting at times, right? Which implies that it is more likely for Hispanics to live in poverty than other segments of the population that are not Hispanic.

I was in the same situation of "poverty", and my GPA, at the time, was 3.8. No, it was entirely because I was not Hispanic, as the scholarships I'd qualify for unfortunately were based upon race, not performance, or economics. The latter two, being cited as the more important reasons, were clearly a front.

So er, yeah, unfortunately I sometimes agree with the GOP on the immigration issue, but not because of race, but because how often I'm insulted being a citizen and scrutinized more, treated unfairly, opposed to someone else who was never from here, and decides to go to school, or try for benefits (as the other poster mentioned). It's a situation that needs to 180.

I see where you're coming from. Immigration should really not be a partisan issue.

Nevertheless, it perhaps is not the fault of the numerically academically under-represented Hispanic population across the land nor the scholarships created to help rectify that misproportion of the population in the first place.

Some people seem to confuse a mechanism designed to rectify socioeconomic inequalities in access to equalizing conditions with those that are entitled to the entire population.

I just find it heavily ironic that those that stand to gain the most from having an uneducated illegal immigrant workforce are those that earn higher profits as a partial result of this lack of education. But that is truly another topic.

You're for universal, right?

I don't see how not clamping down on the current immigration crisis is an option, really. I want to be healthy, people coming in here illegally already tax the healthcare system, and bringing it to universal will just keep the trend going. If illegal immigrants are outright denied, it would be inhumane. So really we're stuck footing the bill until Republicans want to pull their heads out of their ### and allow universal, and Democrats pull their heads out of their ### and enforce/strengthen our immigration enforcement. The laws are already there.

[Heracles 417]

The money is there- its just being squandered on things like fun times in Iraq.

FWIW I'd really like for you to substantiate your claim that I've boldened above. Fancy us if you please are capable.

Yes, clearly county education budgets have a lot to do with Iraq.

I have spoken to a number of teachers who have mentioned it to me. In one school in particular, kids with autism have a part time assistant. While the Hispanic Esol kids have 2 full-time teachers. Guess how many assistants kids with learning disabilities have, zero.

Edited September 2, 2008 by Aficionado

[HAL 9000 96]

Many Hispanics don't qualify for those same 'scholarships.'

So is it an immigrant/Hispanic issue or is it something else? Economic status perhaps?? yes... both are intersecting at times, right? Which implies that it is more likely for Hispanics to live in poverty than other segments of the population that are not Hispanic.

I was in the same situation of "poverty", and my GPA, at the time, was 3.8. No, it was entirely because I was not Hispanic, as the scholarships I'd qualify for unfortunately were based upon race, not performance, or economics. The latter two, being cited as the more important reasons, were clearly a front.

So er, yeah, unfortunately I sometimes agree with the GOP on the immigration issue, but not because of race, but because how often I'm insulted being a citizen and scrutinized more, treated unfairly, opposed to someone else who was never from here, and decides to go to school, or try for benefits (as the other poster mentioned). It's a situation that needs to 180.

I see where you're coming from. Immigration should really not be a partisan issue.

Nevertheless, it perhaps is not the fault of the numerically academically under-represented Hispanic population across the land nor the scholarships created to help rectify that misproportion of the population in the first place.

Some people seem to confuse a mechanism designed to rectify socioeconomic inequalities in access to equalizing conditions with those that are entitled to the entire population.

I just find it heavily ironic that those that stand to gain the most from having an uneducated illegal immigrant workforce are those that earn higher profits as a partial result of this lack of education. But that is truly another topic.

You're for universal, right?

I don't see how not clamping down on the current immigration crisis is an option, really. I want to be healthy, people coming in here illegally already tax the healthcare system, and bringing it to universal will just keep the trend going. If illegal immigrants are outright denied, it would be inhumane. So really we're stuck footing the bill until Republicans want to pull their heads out of their ### and allow universal, and Democrats pull their heads out of their ### and enforce/strengthen our immigration enforcement. The laws are already there.

Illegals coming into a hypothetical universal system would overtax it as long as we sought economical models that favored spending countless billions in illegal wars more so than in maintaining a healthcare system that actually costs MUCH less to operate and *insure* than the current user-screwed system we don't particularly enjoy.

So, immigrant status aside, healthcare would be effectively trumped out of the debate if we had a healthcare system that ironically costs less, thereby increasing the relative funds to provide for additional patients when needed and to reeducate users about the value of preventative medicine. By definition, preventative medicine is smarter and cheaper than emergency-run medicine.

[peejay 327]

Probably true, given the nature of their existence within the borders of the US. However, its not an immigration topic, rather an economical one. The premise is in having colleges and universities provide higher-caliber graduates (independent of immigration status) into the workforce and as a result, society.

It is an (illegal) immigration issue. ####### legislation like the DREAM Act is bad public policy. First off, it gives benefits to illegal aliens that are denied to US citizens (i.e.: lower in-state tuition rates to foreigners illegally in our country while denying those same rates to US citizens). Also, training illegal aliens to work illegally in the US workforce is rather moronic. It's on par with giving driving privileges to people that are in our country illegally. Whether they are present here and now in the USA is irrelevant. They are arrestable, detainable, and deportable under long standing US laws. They have absolutely no entitlement to be rewarded for breaking numerous laws of our country.

It disgusts me to no end that politicians whether Republican, Democrat, or whatever would pander to this illegal community and its cheerleaders for cheap votes or political gain when the negative effects of open borders is more than obvious.

Rewarding illegal aliens is a recipe for more and more of the same. Don't believe me? Just look at what 7 illegal alien amnesties have wraught since the first in 1986.

In-state tuition for in-state residents. Compared to in-state tuition for [illegal] residents of that state. That is not that hard to swallow, besides the illegal part. The argument is about economics, not immigrant status.

The ones being denied an in-state tuition rate are out-of-state attendees to these colleges and universities. At which point they can claim residency after meeting that state's residency requirements (usually 30 days to 6 months, depending by state). If an illegal alien that was accepted to Community College X, can show residency in that state, then its a matter of residency- not immigrant status.

Wanting to pass off another topic as this one or another knee-jerk is your right, I suppose.

Illegal presence hardly qualifies as legal residency in my dictionary. You are refering to a community that has no legal residecy and, as such, are arrestable and deportable. It is unfortunate that taxpayer funded community or state college takes it upon itself to piss away taxpayer moneys educating adults that have no legal right to this benefit. While the US courts have ruled that minor illegal alien children cannot be denied a public education...adult illegal aliens are a far different matter.

Your dictionary is not the dictionary that defines the physical residency of a person with respect to college tuition. Which so happens to be, again, the topic at hand.

Discussion of the merits of immigration status is well... related to the topic, and many universities require that their students be legal residents of the US. No debating that.

Show me where in the law where illegal presence = residency.

There are also cities that violate federal law by harboring illegal aliens and declaring themselves "sanctuary cities". That doesn't stop ICE one iota from arresting illegal aliens in their cities and deporting them.

Your definition of "resident" is a declaration with no merit or legal standing. If fact, it is against federal law to give benifits to illegal aliens that are not also available to US citizens. But like many other aspects of the illegal immigration issue, laws that should be enforced are not enforced and have not been enforced.

[HAL 9000 96]

The money is there- its just being squandered on things like fun times in Iraq.

FWIW I'd really like for you to substantiate your claim that I've boldened above. Fancy us if you please are capable.

Yes, clearly county education budgets have a lot to do with Iraq.

I have spoken to a number of teachers who have mentioned it to me. In one school in particular, kids with autism have a part time assistant. While the Hispanic Esol kids have 2 full-time teachers. Guess how many assistants kids with learning disabilities have, zero.

Perhaps these 'teachers' could inform you that these ESL students spend X amount of hours in regular coursework and Y amount of hours in ESL coursework. You can't be in two places simultaneously. This is called teacher rotation. ESL teachers get paid to be ESL teachers. They earn their paycheck just like English, Math, Science, etc, do. Claiming there are additional funds above and beyond other students is ludicrous since part of the investment that would otherwise go into providing these students with a full schedule goes into ESL instead. Again... these teachers should have been able to tell you that.

Furthermore, do look up funding rates at federal levels for pre-NCLB school districts (that supplement state funds that supply these districts, on top of county supplements). Federal funds that are depleted whenever an idiot in Washington wants to do something brash where he's not supposed to.

[Heracles 417]

I don't see how not clamping down on the current immigration crisis is an option, really. I want to be healthy, people coming in here illegally already tax the healthcare system, and bringing it to universal will just keep the trend going. If illegal immigrants are outright denied, it would be inhumane. So really we're stuck footing the bill until Republicans want to pull their heads out of their ### and allow universal, and Democrats pull their heads out of their ### and enforce/strengthen our immigration enforcement. The laws are already there.

It is not going to happen. No country can simply cover 20,000,000 for free. Yet the reality is that they will need to be covered under a UHC.

Keep in mind Australia spends over $60 billion a year to cover 21 million people.