Apparently, the explosion of new/legal sources of marijuana in Kalifornia is affecting the exercise of common sense: Court OKs in-state tuition for illegal immigrants - U.S. news - Life - msnbc.com
So let me get this straight, a) my state tax dollars (I own a house in San Diego) are now going to fund the education of illegal aliens, b) not only at my financial expense, but also at the expense of the reduction of admission of legal citizens (who now cannot be admitted due to class size limitations). Am I reading this correctly?
1. Budgetary Effect. Perhaps the California Legislature should have thought a little more carefully about this back in 2001 when it passed the law approving in-state tuition rates for illegal aliens. I guess nobody cared about State budget shortfalls at the time. For clarity, the issue isn't that other legal in-staters would take those seats anyway so it's a net zero effect on revenues, it's that if those illegal in-staters were excluded then that's just more seats for out-of-states who pay the higher tuition rates. Obviously, given more recent events, budgeting and financial planning isn't a strong suit of the Legislature.
2. Immigration Policy. And, shouldn't there be clear and obvious incentives to becoming a citizen? After all, if you're a citizen then there's a much higher chance that the individual will be on the radar of the IRS and therefore have an opportunity to join in the privilege of paying some TAXES in order to fund the educational desires of other citizens.
I just don't get it.
So let me get this straight, a) my state tax dollars (I own a house in San Diego) are now going to fund the education of illegal aliens, b) not only at my financial expense, but also at the expense of the reduction of admission of legal citizens (who now cannot be admitted due to class size limitations). Am I reading this correctly?
1. Budgetary Effect. Perhaps the California Legislature should have thought a little more carefully about this back in 2001 when it passed the law approving in-state tuition rates for illegal aliens. I guess nobody cared about State budget shortfalls at the time. For clarity, the issue isn't that other legal in-staters would take those seats anyway so it's a net zero effect on revenues, it's that if those illegal in-staters were excluded then that's just more seats for out-of-states who pay the higher tuition rates. Obviously, given more recent events, budgeting and financial planning isn't a strong suit of the Legislature.
2. Immigration Policy. And, shouldn't there be clear and obvious incentives to becoming a citizen? After all, if you're a citizen then there's a much higher chance that the individual will be on the radar of the IRS and therefore have an opportunity to join in the privilege of paying some TAXES in order to fund the educational desires of other citizens.
I just don't get it.
Last edited: