OPINION & EDITORIAL
Salas resignation bold, yet justified
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Jason Smathers:
- Your Christmas gift: Lighten up! (December 13, 2007)
- America in dire need of education on gender identity (December 7, 2007)
- Getting off or going down: Is porn destructive? (December 5, 2007)
- Catholic group deserves funding, at least for now (November 28, 2007)
Related Stories:
- The key word is 'illegal' (December 4, 2003)
- Immigration issues demand joint effort (March 31, 2005)
- Illegal immigrants not welcome (September 14, 2007)
- Sensenbrenner wrong on immigration (March 27, 2006)
- Immigration debate truly cultural, not economic (November 16, 2007)
by Jason Smathers
Wednesday, October 31, 2007
Considering the almost criminal stagnation on the issue of illegal immigration, someone needed to say something. Even our U.S. Congress has failed to make any statement, one way or the other, on the nearly millions of illegal immigrants currently working and living among the rest of the recognized citizenry of the United States. While Lou Dobbs continues to parrot the issue daily on CNN and right-wing extremists continue to advocate massive deportation, our representatives and officials have failed to move in any direction.
However, in Wisconsin, one man finally took a stand.
On Friday, UW System Regent Jesus Salas handed in his resignation to Gov. Jim Doyle following Mr. Doyle’s signing of the Wisconsin budget. For Mr. Salas, the omission of a bill that would give the children of illegal immigrants in-state tuition for the UW System and the Wisconsin Technical College System was the final straw. In his letter to Mr. Doyle, Mr. Halas wrote, “I refuse to join you in celebrating the signing of the 2007-09 WI budget. For us, it is a day of mourning for the future of our children who, through no fault of their own, continue to be denied access to the UW-System.”
While it’s obvious that the detrimental effects of illegal immigration must be addressed, the details of the rejected bill show that Mr. Salas’ and those who advocate for steady integration of the illegal population have legitimate points.
Critics have deliberately used the lowest level of analysis in order to condemn this bill and similar provisions. Anti-immigration proponents have argued this bill is simply a discount for illegal immigrants, which allows them to continue freeloading off the country they snuck into in the first place. However, to evaluate this failed bill as an extension of amnesty is to ignore the language of the bill as well as the ultimate reality of the immigration crisis in this country.
The provision would have required those applying for the UW System or the WTCS to have either graduated from a Wisconsin high school or received “high-school graduation equivalency” from the state of Wisconsin. Also, the applicant for a UW-System school must have been consistently present for three years following the first day of enrollment in a Wisconsin high school. However, the most important facet of this bill is the following stipulation: “… The person enrolls in the UW System of WTCS institution and provides that institution with a written affidavit that the person has filed or will file an application for a permanent resident visa with the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services as soon as the person is eligible to do so.” This is not simply opening world-class education to freeloaders — it is allowing qualified students who wish to live here legally and who abide by the rule of law to do so legitimately.
The argument, “Why give anything to individuals who have committed a felony,” is absolutely fruitless. This is not handing welfare checks to undocumented workers, it’s not giving health care to those who have tripped across the border and it certainly isn’t letting those who have deliberately crossed this border to simply siphon off tax-free wages for those back home. These are teenagers, mere children, who crossed the border with their families or were born here. To label innocent teenagers who have shown a productive desire to become contributing members to American society as criminal simply perpetuates the cycle of these economic refugees. And all because we consider them “illegal.”
There needs to be a political reality check in this country: We cannot continue to translate the “illegal” status of Mexican, Central American or South American immigrants, into criminal behavior. Every story on “The O’Reilly Factor” points to an illegal immigrant who murdered someone, robbed someone or committed some heinous crime worthy of decades in jail as another example of the scourge illegal immigrants bring to the United States. In what parallel universe of reasoning does undocumented status show devious intent? Simply because they didn’t obey the law? Do those who fail to pay taxes seek to harm others or tear apart their nation? Of course not, and neither do those most of those flout border security laws seek to burn America to the ground. There is legitimacy to the claim that some of those who enter our country have connections with terrorist cells. For that reason we must put more effort and funding into limiting immigration and securing our borders. However, the vast majority of illegal immigrants in this country seek only to live a secure and prosperous life, not to gnaw at the fibers holding this country together. In fact, they probably do more to hold it together by way of sheer labor than most groups in this country.
It is for this reason that a strict adherence to the “rule of law” must give way to an honest and sobering evaluation of this crisis. Even if we could deport every illegal immigrant in this country, given the economic suicide — both in terms of cost of deportation and the loss of a powerful and reliable labor force — and the morally abhorrent humanitarian crisis it would entail, this option is completely unfeasible. We can only look inward toward transforming those hidden from the scope of the law into tax-paying, full-fledged citizens.
While there are certainly illegal immigrants who merit deportation, such as those who have committed crimes other than crossing the border, these students have proven themselves to be productive members of society. They are ready to accept the responsibilities and duties of U.S. citizenship through rigorous education and should be welcomed with open arms, not forced out of their homes.
Mr. Salas may be accused of overreacting by resigning his position as regent, but in reality, it’s a bold move meant as a call to action on immigration reform. As a state and nation, it’s time to heed that call.
Jason Smathers (jsmathers@wisc.edu) is a senior majoring in journalism and history.
Anonymous (October 31, 2007 @ 8:39am):
My son was born in Wisconsin. All 8 great-parents graduated from Wisconsin high schools.
Because we moved before he started school we had to pay non-resident tuition. The loans won't be paid off for alamost 30 years.
But that's the rules. That's the LAW!
You don't don't seem to think that rules should apply to illegal aliens. What about bank robbers? What laws do these criminals need to observe? Just the ones they like?
Bring the troops home from Korea, Germany and Japan so they can guard our borders! 2,000 miles of concertina wire would be cheap compared to the cost of illegal immigration.
"Anti-immigration proponents have argued this bill is simply a discount for illegal immigrants"
Absolutely correct! And it's "Anti-ILLEGAL-immigration proponents" to you!
Do you really think that criminals need another incentive to break the law? This would be rewarding criminal behaviour. Criminal behaviour should be punished, not rewarded.
PS. "recognized citizenry of the United States" - ROFLMAO - that's MUCH more deceptive than the standard "undocumented immigrants". There are long-standing processes for becoming a US citizen and none of them involve breaking the law.
Anonymous (October 31, 2007 @ 8:58am):
Kudos for Salas for resigning. That way, Governor Doyle can replace him with someone who believes in the rule of law and that illegal behavior shouldn't be rewarded. But I'm not holding my breath.
Anonymous (October 31, 2007 @ 9:54am):
So Salas wants to be an advocate for criminals? He wnats to see crime rewarded by the State?
Will he also be looking for special treatment for the children of bank robbers? After all the children are innocent and the parents may have only robbed banks to provide a better life for their children.
No difference. None.
Anonymous (October 31, 2007 @ 11:17am):
great article. authors of the above comments apparently didn't read it. they saw "illegal immigration" and spouted off the same ignorant, intolerant rhetoric.
we're talking about students who successfully completed high school here in Wisconsin just like many of us that attend UW. what are you people so afraid of!?! you support a meritocracy, but only if a few of us are actually given the resources to succeed?
Anonymous (October 31, 2007 @ 11:18am):
I say that the USA should set up a Foreign Legion on the French model.
Then "teenagers who have shown a productive desire to become contributing members to American society" would be allowed to join. After serving in the Legion for a certain period of time, a legionnaire could apply for US citizenship.
Anonymous (October 31, 2007 @ 12:17pm):
"what are you people so afraid of!?!"
rewarding criminal activity will result in more criminal activity.
do you really think that illegal immigration is too low and that additonal incentives are wise?
Anonymous (October 31, 2007 @ 12:27pm):
The REAL problem is not the immigrants, but the American corporations that NEED cheap labor and hire these people.
And to Senor Salas, good riddance. Which "in state" do undocumented illegals belong? Sonora, Chihuahua, Jalisco, or Wisconsin?
Anonymous (October 31, 2007 @ 12:37pm):
8:39-- First, props on being 40 years old and using "ROFLMAO" and trolling college newspaper websites. Second, you CHOSE to move away, and then to send your kid out of state for college. He could have gone to an in-state school like the rest of us, your whining is just dumb.
Immigrant children did not choose to be brought here, and it is doubtful their families endure the trek to the US and the daily harassment and discrimination they face from people like you, just to pay $6000+ a year to send their kids to college. Why shouldn't all graduates of the same high school have the same opportunities, regardless of where their parents were born? What's next, banning immigrant children from public elementary and high schools? (I pray I didn't give any future Sensenbrenners and Dobbses ideas)
Anonymous (October 31, 2007 @ 12:55pm):
"What's next, banning immigrant children from public elementary and high schools?"
What a wonderful idea. Just deport them all. Get iRobot to come up with replacements.
Anonymous (October 31, 2007 @ 12:58pm):
I'm confused, I thought children of illegal immigrants that are born in the U.S. are U.S. citizens? Wouldn't they automatically be eligible for in-state tuition then?
Also, if people are going to crack down on lawbreaking, what about the THOUSANDS of underage drinkers in the city of Madison. Are we going to crack down on that, too? Please.
Anonymous (October 31, 2007 @ 1:30pm):
Let's see, in-state tuition is $6,700 or so now. Still going up yearly of course. Out-of-state tuition is roughly twice as much.
I suspect the real cost of a year at UW is somewhere in between. So who then subsidizes the illegals under this plan. I suspect it's maybe the taxpayers of this state. Our property taxes continue to grow thanks to the hairbrained "equalized valuation" method given to us by gutless legislatures that didn't want to actually vote on tax increases.
How about the Wisconsin's Unfair Sales act of 1939 that is adding 25 to 30 cents per gallon of gas in this state. How that would help some of us now, but the legislature will never dump it.
At least they finally got rid of the automatic annual gasoline tax increase. But this state is already one of the highest taxed states in the union. We don't need to add more even if it makes some of us feel good in the process.
As a taxpayer of this state, and since this little plum would be another drain on the taxpayers, why not have a referendum and see what the voters have to say. I think this should be entrusted to those who pay the freight and not the elected elite in Madison. Or well intentioned students. This little nugget would be very expensive. And I for one don't want to continue the upward spiral of the taxes I send into this government. It's going up fast enough as it is. But I would follow the opinion of the voters.
I think Doyle did the right thing. And I think as you get older Jason, and start watching more and more of your earnings head to governments you're opinion may change. Enjoy your college years. Life gets tougher after you leave the little cacoon of the university.
Anonymous (October 31, 2007 @ 1:39pm):
Jason, you talk about morality.
Where is your morality for the two million legal immigrant children who have been waiting years overseas for a green card and are still there waiting?
Where is your morality for them when their sponsored parent dies by the thousands every year before stepping foot in the US because the wait has been made so long by past amnesties for illegal aliens, thus meaning they will not get to move to the USA and attend college here?
Where is your morality for the 40 million non-Latin American high school graduates overseas who will not benefit from the Dream act because it rewards Latin Americans at a rate 20 times higher than non-Latin Americans?
I think you need to re-evaluate your "morality" since is supports penalizing law abiding immigrants AND discrimination based on national origin.
Vinh Le
Legal Immigrants First
www.legalimmigrantsfirst.org
Anonymous (October 31, 2007 @ 1:54pm):
"I'm confused, I thought children of illegal immigrants that are born in the U.S. are U.S. citizens?"
Yes, you are confused - this discussion has nothing to do with US citizens, it is all about people NOT BORN in the USA who commited the crime of entering the USA illegally. As far as the children go, ignorance of the law is no excuse.
Anonymous (October 31, 2007 @ 2:06pm):
In-state tuition is $7,010 for 2007-08. Out-of-state tuition is roughly THREE times as much at $21,010.
Each illegal alien allowed in-state tuition would cost $14,000 per year. Just how did the proposed law deal with the loss of revenue? Did it short-change the University or increase taxes?
PS. Did the proposed law have any provisions concerning other laws that illegal aliens typically ignore, like payroll taxes, income taxes and ID fraud? Would there be any provision to ensure that the tuition wasn't being paid with cash that had never been taxed?
Anonymous (October 31, 2007 @ 2:21pm):
It seems fair for the children to get in-state tuition. Think of all the money that we save from having their parents work minimum wage at Wal-Mart and as janitors.
Captain Murray
Anonymous (October 31, 2007 @ 2:46pm):
Immigration, illegal or not, is not a zero-sum game, as some of the above comments appear to indicate.
America accepts more immigrants each year than all other nations on this planet combined. We have the capacity to deal with this issue.
I think most of the critics of Jason's article didn't actually read the article. He didn't argue that illegal immigration was perfect, nor did he argue that illegal immigration was a good thing. What he said was that we need to accept the fact that illegal immigrants are here in these United States, and that many of them are productive members of society. If we as a society want to benefit, we should offer the children of those immigrants the opportunity to attend college and contribute to the greater well-being of all Americans.
Ignorant comments like "rewarding criminal activity will encourage more criminal activity" put malicious intent into the actions of illegal immigrants. I suspect that most immigrants simply want a better life, and do not come to America with the intent to commit crimes. Of course, some do commit crimes, and they need to be dealt with. But to blanket all illegal immigrants as malicious criminals is ignorant. I suspect the ancestors of a number of the posters above came to this country illegally. If they found this out, would they argue that they don't deserve access to an education?
Anonymous (October 31, 2007 @ 4:46pm):
12:59-- We could also start cracking down on government corruption, labor law violations, etc. But while those things are profitable to a few elites, nothing will change.
1:30-- What's up with all the old people? The fact is, illegal immigrants still pay taxes -- they pay property tax through rent, and sales tax through bills, groceries, gas, etc. They could just as equally complain for the same reason as you, that they should benefit from their tax dollars, and not prop up others. What about poor citizens, who live on welfare or otherwise don't pay taxes (including some rich folk), should they not get to benefit from public education?
1:39-- Vinh, why do you feel like it's the right of anyone to immigrate here, or at least why some have more of a right? Latin Americans immigrate here at a higher rate, and immigrate illegally at a higher rate, because of vicinity. A lot of South Americans are flocking into Chile, Mexicans here, Turks into Germany, etc. That's just how migration happens. Deal with it. If it's that urgent for you to leave your home country, there are plenty of other countries around which are more immigrant-friendly (Scandinavia) and closer, which might not be America but are a step up. And if it's really a life or death issue, apply for asylum or migrate illegally.
Anonymous (October 31, 2007 @ 5:04pm):
"Ignorant comments like "rewarding criminal activity will encourage more criminal activity" put malicious intent into the actions of illegal immigrants."
Yeah, I guess it's mostly just GREED, not evil intentions - just like big pharma and the oil barons.
Anonymous (October 31, 2007 @ 5:08pm):
"Think of all the money that we save from having their parents work minimum wage at Wal-Mart and as janitors."
What about all those that work for cash and pay no taxes? I don't have the money to pay for someone like that to do my yardwork so I get no benefit at all.
BTW, I don't think that Wal-mart has any minimum wage jobs.
Anonymous (November 1, 2007 @ 8:41am):
What part of "illegal" is unclear?
If you broke the law to get here, you havew no right to demand benefits funded by the taxpayers.
Every "break" that is given to an illegal immigrant means that some benefit is denied to someone who is here legally.
This is nothing more than a cold slap in the face to those who follow the rules and wait in line to get here.
Add a comment
We welcome your thoughts, but please keep your feedback thoughtful, on-topic and respectful. Offensive language, personal attacks, or irrelevant comments may be deleted.
Login...
Not registered? Sign up now.
It's quick, free, and the email address you provide will not be sold or solicited.
