Former Washington Post Reporter: My Life as an Undocumented Immigrant

I don't think it's your basic stance on the issue that people find offensive. It's how you've gone about arguing it and the comparisons you have made.

 

Agreed.
The problem we've had here in little RI is illegals screaming that they deserve the rights that the citizens of the state do. I disagree, because they are not citizens of the state. They are not citizens. There's one student who's an illegal and he's lived in RI his whole life. He graduated high school and wants to go to State U, but State U won't give him in-state tuition because he's not a state resident. People are claiming it's racist, it's unfair, blah, blah, blah.
Those are the things that annoy me about the issue, which is why I'm so dead-set with my stance.

 

That's a very difficult thing to ascertain. What do you do, let everyone in and three years later deport those who aren't "a productive member of society"? Or force them to meet some sort of criteria to begin with (sort of what the current laws require)?

I agree the system is far from perfect and persons far smarter than I have wrestled futily with the lack of a workable solution. I will say, however, that the US is far from the only country that has immigration standards. Mixed feelings on that one, too.

 

If you've lived in RI for practically your whole life (the kid hasn't or he'd be a citizen), you know nothing else. You've grown up as an American and probably would have a tough time fitting in their native country. The tuition thing is a little asinine, because in-state residency is a subjective process in many states, and some schools give in-state tuition for certain majors to recruit students.

 

Maybe Rhody can help create a list of illegals as a few employees of the Utah's department in charge of welfare did.

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/52077397-78/carson-bassett-list-services.html.csp

 

Racism is the issue for many of the people screaming about illegals.

But in your example there is a process to follow and I can see the satnce that if you are here illegally, that's up to you with all the hurdles that come with it.

But it's tough when you are talking about kids being brought over here. It's not like they had any choice or knowledge.

 

So what's the message to the kid, he needs to choose his parents more carefully?

 

Interview with Howard Kurtz:

http://reliablesources.blogs.cnn.com/2011/06/26/vargas-goes-public-about-illegal-immigrant-status/

 

I don't think there's a message to the kid. While he lives in Rhode Island, he's not a legal citizen of the state, therefore he shouldn't expect to have the same rights as someone who does live here.
My buddy lived in Mass., but his parents had a place near URI; after high school, he changed his address to that house, got an RI drivers' license and got in-state tuition for being a state resident. If the kid had documentation to prove he lived in RI, he should be allowed to get in-state tuition. Since he can't prove he's a legal resident, he shouldn't get it. It's pretty simple.
I feel his pain, but rules are rules.

 

There is opposition to the Dream Act is practical. It will deliver liberal and democratic votes and have a profound effect on national and statewide politics. Imagine if the illegals in Arizona or Texas could vote? It's enough to move 2-5 percentage points.

Also, if we allow these illegal immigrants to be legal, then we have to pay them a decent wage (duh!).

BTW, for those that want to kick illegal's out, be careful what you wish for. Georgia has a shortage of farm labor that is severely hurting its agricultural economy.

http://motherjones.com/mojo/2011/06/if-georgia-drives-away-immigrant-workers-will-its-economy-suffer

 

Your friend skirted the rules because had the cash for a place in Rhode Island. He's not a state resident if his parents don't live there. I think you need to rat him out.

Shouldn't the illegal immigrant get in-state tuition because they graduated from a Rhode Island high school?

 

But again, like I suggested... that doesn't really address what the Dream Act would actually do.

The Dream Act would allow a pathway to citizenship for people who (a) came to the country as minors, (b) graduate from high school, and (c) serve honorably in the military or earn a college degree.

It doesn't raise wages for landscapers and lettuce pickers. It does not allow millions of illegal immigrants to vote.

It would allow people brought to this country as a toddler who earn a degree in Psychology to do something other than work part-time as a housekeeper. (Actual example where I live.)

Realistically, its passage wouldn't do a damn thing to sway the Hispanic vote in favor of the Democrats, since Democrats typically support it already. Lawmakers who are opposed aren't afraid of the impact of the Hispanic vote, they're afraid of the reaction of racist supporters who will scream "Amnesty!" anytime a politician says anything other than "what part of 'illegal' don't you understand?"