OT- In State Tuition for "illegal" immigrants [LOCKED]
http://news.yahoo.com/u-m-oks-state-tuition-134341297.html
Not sure how I feel about this. As someone who couldn't go to the university because I couldn't afford out of state tuition I'm a bit annoyed. But it is nice to see that more kids have the option to go to such a great school.
MOD EDIT: Some of the comments are already over the line - the search for nice things continues, I suppose. - LSA
Don't you need either proof of citizenship or a visa to attend a university in the first place?
no, thats only true in three states, georgia is one of them, i forget the other two but i know they are also in the south.
IMO, your comment is a signal of a bigger problem in America. This shouldn't be a political discussion. This is about a policy that a university is putting in place. This type of discussion is exactly the sort that should be free of politics. The polarization of every legal and ethical decision along party lines makes it nearly impossible to have a rational discussion.
In case you decide to argue this, I would simply refer you to President George Washingtons farewell address as my rebuttal. So, to save us all a lot of time, just read this:
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/GPO-CDOC-106sdoc21/pdf/GPO-CDOC-106sdoc21.pdf
This doesn't remove the RESIDENCY requirement for in-state tuition. In fact, for the applicants in question, the residency standards are actually more stingent. It just removes the "legal status" requirement.
Undocumented applicants from Ohio are still out-of-staters. But a kid who has been in Michigan since 2000 and has spent his entire school career in Michigan schools would be able to receive in-state tuition.
Spidery topic.
Can any of them play football?
The out-of-state resident does not.
And a number of illegal aliens don't pay income tax. So there has to be a better reasoning.
You may find that law stupid, think it should be changed, and/or believe it shouldn't apply to some or all of those it applies to, but it remains US law.
Bu if you believe that, face the fact head on. Making a big deal out of the semantics and euphemisms comes off as disingenuous.
Because the term "illegal" tells you exactly nothing about whether the person in question has filed for naturalization. I'm not exaggerating when I say this process can take over a decade and cost thousands of dollars. For others, it may cost next to nothing and take a few months; there's a very high variance.
You're right, it DOES remain US law...which is why the university has decided to prioritize residency.
And I strongly suspect that the majority of these families initially came to the US without legal authority to do so, or came here on ostensibly temporary visas with no intention of actually leaving, and only later applied for permanent residency for all or some of their family members.
But that's just a semi-educated guess, so I'd be open to statistics showing otherwise. And I don't deny that some are in the boat of trying to do everything on the up and up and just got caught in legal limbo. I just don't expect that those people constitute a particularly large portion of -all illegal immigrants in the US.
I've known enough immigrants to know the process is hell, but that's part of why I'm a little irked at people skipping the process demanding the same, and sometimes more, benefits as people who went through all that and followed the rules.
people are not illegal. its a term that criminalizes the person, when it is the action that is illegal, not the person.
It is a demeaning term, nobody calls you illegal when you speed in your car or drink under age, it is 100% used to lower the value of the person when undocumented is just as accurate.
Is that person who steals or whatever isn't doing anything illegal after the act. The fact that they're here presently is an ongoing illegal act. The law isn't against just coming into the country without paperwork, but staying here. (You can come to the country legally, and still be illegal if you overstay your paperwork). So in fact, their mere presence here is illegal. So yes, the person is in fact illegal because they're committing a crime every minute they're in the country and not returning from where they came.
Personally (keeping in mind I am not the poster you are questioning) I like to use quotes to indicate the issue being discussed, but to try to remove the emotion of a given term. The goal is to discuss something on the merits.
NVM. Beaten to the punch by like 4 people.
Did you not read the stringent residency requirements? You can't just hop into the country for the tail end of your kid's schooling and get in-state tuition. This isn't about "worthiness," it's about prioritization of residency. Naturalization battles can last over a decade.
Not a fan of the Regents making the call on this due to many implications of this decision. If Regents change does it get revoked? In Maryland, this was first voted in by the politicians and then was blocked by a lawsuit. A referendum was held and the voters approved it. The state taxpayers/voters own the universities abnd should be the decisionn makers.
Did you not read the article? This isn't a new idea. It's been going on in various states and universities since 2001 at least.
State taxpayers don't "own" the univerisities; don't be asinine. They only "own" as much of the university as the percent of tax money that goes toward it...which at the latest count was 16.6%
its a INSULT to all US citizens who would have liked to attend a school like UM but if living out of state CANT AFFORD IT...
Michigan Universities have almost complete autonomy under the State Constitution. The MIchigan Legislature CAN'T make these changes. In a previous life I was working on an "in-state tuition for returning veterans" thing, and we were informed that such a change would have to be voluntary on the part of the schools (they did it, FWIW, and again bravo to them).
Michigan is one of the few states (if not the only state) with this kind of structure. It makes for some iteresting dealings.
I'm not sure how many students this ruling will impact, but if it is more than a few, I guess they can just increase OOS tuition expenses . /s
I do not consider that we are the most expensive public university for OOS students to be a badge we should wear proudly.
This country is the titanic and hit the iceberg in the 60s. Slowly sinking every year.
If the Titanic had taken 53 years to actually sink, all the lives that would have been saved!
"Oh hey, a new thread! I'm sure I can read it without becoming angry about other people's opinions..."
-Me, about 5 minutes ago.
Definitely the best comment of the day.
Great day for the University of Michigan.
Chose Purdue over Michigan due out of state tuition for Michigan.
Well, I couldn't attend Michigan because although my test scores were decent, my grades were slacker level. And now, they're letting illegal immigrants who have actually worked hard in school (and thus are working to become a productive member of our society) get into U of M at the same cost I would've had to pay?!?! OUTRAGE!!!
/s
That said, I worry about the message this sends to legal immigrants, who make up a significant portion of the student body and many of whom had to jump through pretty major hoops to get and maintain legal permission to reside and/or go to school in the US.
Because if I were a betting man, I'd wager that a very large portion of the illegal immigrants who benefit from this rule are currently jumping through those major hoops and just haven't finished fighting their battles yet.
DELETE
So if I have this right someone in this country ILLEGALY who does not live IN STATE is entitled to in-state tuition?????? while someone BORN HERE living out of state MUST pay higher tuition? Im Sorry but this is ANOTHER liberal ruse that falls on backs of U S TAXPAYERS.....and they wonder why this country is going broke!
You didn't read the article, you didn't read the comments, and you may have just ruined the thread for everyone with what appears to be a YouTube-style comment. Have fun in Bolivia.
No, you don't have this right.
I'mma guess you didn't read the article.
It's been a while since we've had a good ol' neg-bang thread.