Archive for Friday, January 21, 2011

Statehouse Live: Brownback mum on repeal of in-state tuition for children of some illegal immigrants

January 21, 2011


— Conservative Republicans in the House have teed up a bill to repeal in-state tuition for undocumented students residing in Kansas.

But their fellow conservative Republican Gov. Sam Brownback refused Friday to say what he thinks about that.

“I’m not ready to comment on that,” Brownback said.

He said he supports a proposal that requires voters to show a photo ID to vote and proof of citizenship to register to vote.

But on the in-state tuition issue, he declined to weigh in.

The law was signed by Gov. Kathleen Sebelius, a Democrat, in 2004. Under the law, a student is eligible for the lower in-state tuition rate at a higher education institution if he or she has attended a Kansas high school for three years or more, graduated or received a GED, and signs an affidavit that he or she will apply for legal residency when eligible to do so.

Approximately 400 students in 2010 were benefiting from the provisions of the law. Many attempts to repeal it have failed, but opponents of the law believe they have a better chance of repealing it now because of the large number of new conservatives elected in the House.

But Senate Democratic Leader Anthony Hensley of Topeka said that while the repeal measure would probably pass in the House, it wouldn’t in the Senate.

He said the law is helping give some students “the chance to pursue the American dream.”

While in the U.S. Senate, Brownback had been an early supporter of the so-called Dream Act, which would have allowed in-state tuition for the children of some undocumented immigrants, and provided a way toward permanent residency. The federal legislation was similar to laws that were approved in some states, including Kansas.

But in December, Brownback, in one of his final actions in the Senate, voted against the measure.


ksjayhawk74 7 years, 3 months ago

The Kansas Conservatives clearly have the right answer to the question; "What would Jesus Do?", in this matter.

Take that, children!

Kent Shrack 7 years, 3 months ago

Repeal it Repeal it Repeal it. It should have never been passed in the first place.

ivalueamerica 7 years, 3 months ago

You realize when the Bible says suffer the children..that is NOT a commandment..doncha?

storm 7 years, 3 months ago

Children born in the USA, born in Kansas deserve to be schooled in Kansas. As such, they should pay the same rate as other children regardless of their parents’ ethnicities or felonies. To do otherwise, reeks of veiled bigotry. Traditional Republicans and Democrats know and understand this but conservatives just don’t seem to get it.

jhawkinsf 7 years, 3 months ago

Children born in the USA and raised in Kansas would qualify for in-state tuition. What is being discussed are those not born in the USA and then came here illegally. Should they qualify for in-state tuition?

any 7 years, 3 months ago

What about the students not born in the USA? Should their felonies be taken into account? If I'm understanding the statute correctly (KSA 76-731a) it looks like it addresses students without a valid immigration status.

Kent Shrack 7 years, 3 months ago

Those born here are residents. However, A person Born in Mexico, and living here illegally should not get instate tuition. This law gives instate tuition to criminals. It has nothing to do with legal residents. Read the Law. It states that they must apply for legal residency. If they were born here, they are legal residents. I think storm is the one that just doesn't "get it". It's nice to say it reeks of veiled bigotry but that is far from what this is about. It's my tax dollars going to benefit criminals. Maybe Storm should voluntarily pay the difference in tuition to support the criminals.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 7 years, 3 months ago

Yea, these criminals committed the dastardly act of going to school and graduating in good standing. Oh, the humanity!!!

ivalueamerica 7 years, 3 months ago

Generally, a minor child, especially a baby, can not be held accountable for the law their parents broke and took them along for the ride. They were not able to consent or defy, they had no choice.

However, if you have children, I think...using your own phony ill-logic, we should be able to hold the accountable for all the ignorant things you post here.

ivalueamerica 7 years, 2 months ago

when you quit presenting things are not true as though they are, then I will quit pointing it out.

Fossick 7 years, 3 months ago

Does anyone have an idea of exactly how many students we're talking about in the current academic year?

Kevin Randell 7 years, 3 months ago

tanzer-I know this fact all to well. I received my Master's from KU and tried and tried to achieve in-state tuition. They said NO. Now, I am 60K in debt for a degree that would have only cost me 20-30K.

Fossick 7 years, 3 months ago

It sure did. I'm a big dummy, I guess. Thanks, RuralWanderer.

Kent Shrack 7 years, 3 months ago

A few years ago it was only around 350, but growing. It will grow as Arizonian stands up to throw out the criminals, and Kansas pays them to come.

foppa 7 years, 3 months ago

I absolutely love this dehumanization of people by calling them criminals. When people argue this position I will say this. All (intelligent) people know that the there is a spectrum in violation of laws. What I mean by this is that if someone steals food to feed their family and if someone steals food to sell for drugs, we distinguish between the two crimes. Law is malleable because we are. We, throughout history, have decided that certain laws are unjust. Immigration is no different. If you had bothered to study the history of immigration in the US, you would find out that not long ago women gain citizenship through their husbands (surprise! how you gain citizenship is a man-made concept!). If their husbands died, they would loose citizenship. I'm 95% sure that (unless you are a native american), your ancestors were 'criminals' too (or would have been considered criminals by today's immigration standards. Law and life, my friends, is not black and white. its rich and complex, just like the immigration issue.

Oh and by the way, the state is not paying them to go to school here. These students pay taxes and their parents do too. The difference is that they don't get a refund. You don't believe me? Look it up. Undocumented immigrant pay taxes.

But i forgot in the statue of liberty it says "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore... and we will call them criminals"

ivalueamerica 7 years, 3 months ago

really, you win for inability to add to a debate in any meaningful way ..

You fail.

Shelley Bock 7 years, 3 months ago

I recently had a conversation with my daughter's boyfriend.

He told me he that he had only recently received his American citizenship. Interesting, I hadn't realized that fact. His father came to the US many years ago from Mexico. He worked in the vegetable fields of California. Sometimes, he'd get paid. Other times, he wouldn't. Fortunately for him, he kept all documents and pay stubs. Unlike some of his peers, he had documentation to receive amnesty and residency.

Daughter's boyfriend came to the US as a youngster. He's attended grade school, junior high, high school and post-high school education here in the US. He now works 60-70 hours a week and earns a very good salary. And, he pays his taxes.

He's now registered to vote since he's a citizen. And, you can bet the house that he and his siblings (also citizens) won't be voting Republican.

Maybe that's of some concern to Brownback.

Shelley Bock 7 years, 3 months ago

kubacker, that wins the award for dumbest response. You have no facts whatsoever. You do amuse me.

ivalueamerica 7 years, 3 months ago

You have no value to bring to the table. Please realize you are a failure of the highest magnitude.

Shelley Bock 7 years, 3 months ago

This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

Shelley Bock 7 years, 3 months ago

This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

jhawkinsf 7 years, 3 months ago

What we're all talking about is the Dream Act. The question is complex, dealing with fairness from the perspective of different people. Should a child brought to this country be denied access to services and benefits they would normally be entitled to if they had not been brought here illegally. While it is certainly true that they bear little if any responsibility for the position they now find themselves in, what do we tell the many people around the world who are patiently waiting their turn to come here legally. Is it proper to tell someone that having illegally jumped the line, we will now sanctify that place at the front of the line? It's a complex issue but one that Americans alone should decide. It's our country and we have the sole right to decide our immigration policy. BTW - My mother waited years before she were granted permission to enter this country legally. During that wait my sister was born. But the wait was worth it as they were both became citizens and enjoy all the benefits of citizens.

foppa 7 years, 3 months ago

Yes, but isn't it nice that your mother had the option of coming here legally? A lot of undocumented immigrants don't have the same option. Why? because of economic reasons. I don't see where you are going saying that Americans alone should decide. I don't think undocumented immigrants are voting on this issue..

jafs 7 years, 3 months ago

I believe it's quite expensive for people to come across the border illegally.

jhawkinsf 7 years, 3 months ago

The "nice" option was that she worked hard and waited years. She was living in a war decimated country. What would have been really "nice" would have been if she could simply take a short walk across the border and then expect to be placed at the front of the line for amnesty, services, etc. I feel bad for the children of illegal immigrants. However, it's their parents who put them in this situation. Not me.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 7 years, 3 months ago

But the vast majority of those "waiting" will never get here legally. Your mother was more lucky than "right."

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 7 years, 3 months ago

Illegal immigration happens because employers are looking for the cheapest labor possible. The more desperate the workers, the worse conditions they will tolerate, and the cheaper they will work. If those conditions are eliminated, illegal immigration wouldn't be a significant problem.

jafs 7 years, 3 months ago

That may change - there's currently legislation being proposed that would allow it.

Scott Morgan 7 years, 3 months ago

Why not just change the constitution and laws regarding immigration?

Whoever wants to come in, just come on in. Help yourselves. Background checks, nope. Only a few dozen a year, no worry here. We check I.D.s for only underage drinking, nothing else.

Let us take care of that knee surgery, hey have the baby here, hungry? try our free chow program, some legal problem back home, no problem. Just jump to the front of the line.

Maybe drive thru citizenship or even better one click online citizenship.

What a horrible slap in the face to all waiting for legal immigration.

classclown 7 years, 3 months ago

Why do universities charge In state and Out of state tuition anyway? Why not just charge the same for everyone regardless of what state they live in?

Dan Thalmann 7 years, 3 months ago

I would agree with this. Kansas could handle more population, and if we draw out-of-state students into the state, the chances are better some of them would find a job in Kansas after graduation.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 7 years, 3 months ago

The rationale for in-state tuition is that the state subsidizes the costs of running the universities, so only state residents should get the lower, subsidized rate.

But with the Republican legislature moving towards removing all state funds, the rationale for in-state tuition goes away.

kubmg 7 years, 3 months ago

I could give some elaborate discussion on the political and legal 'why' on this subject. But as everyone can see by reading the comments, that political and legal merits don't seem to matter. So let's try this. You allow it because it feels right. When you read comments like "nasty" people, that doesn't sit well. They are people. In a sense, arguing with people that take such a position is nonsensical. You can't argue with ignorant xenophobic people. Repealing doesn't feel right and there are more positive outcomes (educationally, monetarily, etc) by allowing the process to proceed. Having the process gives those "nasty" people an opportunity to leave Liberal Kansas, making some Liberal folks happy, to live a much more prosperous, less ignorant life.

Shelley Bock 7 years, 3 months ago

Why shouldn't these workers, the "illegals" that you talk about, receive beneit from the taxes they've paid? Unless you're Native American, there's someplace you could go back to Hundley. We're a nation of immigrants, for the most part, so get used to the idea that they're here.

jhawkinsf 7 years, 3 months ago

Many illegal immigrants that work here are paid in cash, under the table, therefore they do not pay taxes on their earnings. Those that do pay taxes using false social security numbers. While those people are paying taxes they are also creating identity theft problems that cost more than the taxes they pay. Yes, we are a country of immigrants, legal and illegal. The questions here are should those two groups be treated the same. I vote no.

Shelley Bock 7 years, 2 months ago

Prosecute those good Americans who pay under the table as you say. That would stop illegal immigration very quickly.

Boston_Corbett 7 years, 3 months ago

Senator Brownback actually co-sponsored "The Dream Act" in 2004 when there was a Republican majority in DC. But when it came up last month in DC, he voted against it.

I presume he knew it wasn't going anywhere in 2004.

So was he pandering to us in 2004? And why did he change his mind on that wonderful legislation that he earlier wanted to take credit for?

Jimo 7 years, 3 months ago

Little angel on right shoulder: What would Jesus do?
Little devil on left shoulder: 1,300 days until the next election.

gbulldog 7 years, 3 months ago

Why are we discussing this issue? A college education is not what it used to be, because many employers, INCLUDING THE STATE OF KANSAS, has lowered standards for job applicants. WORK RELATED EXPERIENCE DOES NOT SUBSTIUTE FOR PROFFESSIONAL EDUCATION unless you apply for job with the State of Kansas or many local governments.

Middle class parents have a problems financing the education of their "average student children" (NOT A SPORTS STAR) unless they are "politically correct". The children of Legal middle class parents are generally not eligible for grants and many loans. As such these kids graduate from less prestigious universities with high debt and live in proverty or live with their parents until they can get rid of their debt. Because society "feels sorry" for certain segements of our society (the "politically correct") and provides special benefits, the majority feels "screwed". And taxes kee[ going up. SO TELL ME. WHY GO TO COLLEGE AND GO INTO DEBT? IF THNK THIS IS NOT HAPPENING LOOK AT DROPOUT RATES SINCE THE 1960 AND WHO IS IN THE COLLEGE CLASSROOM.

Theprof 7 years, 3 months ago

"Do not take advantage of a hired man who is poor and needy, whether he is a brother Israelite or an alien living in one of your towns." Deuteronomy 24:14

Commenting has been disabled for this item.