The 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver dismissed a challenge to Kansas’ immigrant tuition law, ruling 3-0 that the plaintiffs couldn’t demonstrate harm and, therefore, had no legal right to challenge the law. A Topeka judge had dismissed the challenge on the same grounds.
The ruling makes sense.
The 2004 law allows children of illegal immigrants to pay the in-state tuition rate at the state’s public universities. But that’s only if they have attended a Kansas high school for three or more years, graduated or received a high school equivalency from a Kansas school district, and are on the path toward citizenship.
Some out-of-state college students — backed by anti-immigration groups — argued it was unfair that they had to pay higher tuition rates and that the law violated their equal-protection rights. But the in-state tuition rate is based on Kansas residency. And if the out-of-state students want to live in Kansas for three years and meet the other residency requirements of the law, they can qualify for the lower tuition rate, too.
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- Freebird1971 on Open thread 11/23
- Freebird1971 on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- Freebird1971 on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- Regular on Open thread 11/23
- Freebird1971 on Open thread 11/23
118 Comments
Yeah, let’s play the smart money on a couple of dozen illegal alien kids to attend the University in Kansas of their choice. They’ll probably get some grant money that would have been used by a Kansas student and get bumped in line first for food stamps for that locality.
But hey, the heck with those several hundred kids who relatives probably live in Kansas and would pay hundreds of thousands of dollars if not millions of dollars for college tuition in Kansas.
yeah…play that smart money
Perhaps the parents of those illegal aliens who want to get a discount at Kansas Universities are one of these following fine citizens?
“KANSAS CITY, Kan. – An 18-month, multistate probe yielded 22 indictments and the seizure of large quantities of drugs and cash, authorities said.
U.S. Attorney Eric Melgren said most of the suspects were from the Kansas City area.
The drugs — mostly marijuana and cocaine — originated largely in Mexico and were brought in for distribution in the Kansas City area, officials said at a news conference.
“In years gone by, we’ve seen it go through on the interstate highway system,” said Don Medrala, assistant special agent in charge of the Drug Enforcement Agency’s office in Kansas City, Mo. “This was going to stay here.”22 indicted after federal drug probe
Each of those named in the indictment faces one conspiracy count. Several face charges of using a cellular phone in furtherance of drug trafficking, and some are charged with money laundering.
The largest share were from Kansas City, Kan.: Trinidad Marquez-Martinez, 30; Santiago Maldonado, 23; Abel Portillo-Soto, 24; Jaime Ricardo Dominguez-Calderon, 35; Mario Castillo, 38; Jesus Gabriel Gandara-Escarcega, 35; and Esteban Maldonado-Rodriguez, 51.
No hometowns were available for these defendants: Ysidro Juarez Jr., 33; Luis Arturo Castro-Quezada, 44; Manuel Gerardo Terrazas; Yehia Hassen; Erica Barajas; Johnny Sanchez; Julio Cesar Loya-Contreras, 25; and Juan Javier Luna-Polanco.
No immigration counts were filed against any of the defendants, Melgren said, but he did not rule out the possibility that some might have been in the country illegally.”
from Kansas.com
It seems Ian has a cousin. . .
Walk on by. . .
All these people need to quit picking on poor Mexican kids. If the Mexican kid lived in the state and studied and got accepted by KU they should be treated the same as any other kid. It doesn’t matter a bit of they are legal or not. Most of them did not make that choice because they were brought here by their parents who were enticed by employers- such as the meat packers and agri business- to sneak in here. But nobody wants to go after them.
“– backed by anti-immigration groups –”
I have not hear how the KKK was funding the lawsuit. Wouldn’t that be big news? The WE needs to break this story wide open. Or perhaps call them anti-illegal-immigration groups.
The rule of law means nothing if laws are not enforced. However that is exactly what the law means along our southern border.
What they need to do is sue the employers of these people. They are the reason these folks keep sneaking in here. You go into some of these food plants and everybody that works in them is a Mexican and most of them are probably here illegally. And it wasn’t always that way. Used to be that those places paid half decent wages and hired Americans. But then they found that the Mexicans would work for half as much and not bitch about things like cold water and no toilet paper in the bathrooms.
“”"I have not hear how the KKK was funding the lawsuit. Wouldn’t that be big news? The WE needs to break this story wide open. Or perhaps call them anti-illegal-immigration groups.”"”
I don’t doubt that. The KKK is in fact the Republican Party in its most true form.
Our Kansas State legislature needs to act where the courts could not:
State Lawmakers Want To Ban Illegal Immigrants From State Colleges(Richmond, VA) — In one of the touchest attempts to crackdown on illegal immigration in the state yet, Republican lawmakers in Virginia want to keep illegal immigrants from attending any of the state’s public colleges and universities, no matter how long they’ve lived in the US. The new law would cover those who graduated from public high schools in the state, because some Republicans feel illegal immigrants are keeping legal residents from going to college. The bill is sponsored by Representative Jay O’Brien of Fairfax, and also mandates that every jail in the state check the immigration status of those detained, deny bail to illegal immigrants, and suspend business licenses of anyone found guilty of hiring illegal immigrants.
Do it next session!
No immigration counts were filed against any of the defendants, Melgren said, but he did not rule out the possibility that some might have been in the country illegally.”from Kansas.composted by: Kansas
Amen Kansas.
It should be mandatory that law enforcement verify citizenship when making arrests.
Many of the children of illegal immigrants are not “on the path to citizenship.” They are citizens as they were born in the USA.
6-18-07It’s not often that I take the time to share this type of information with friends. I believe that personal view on a lot of political subjects are just that, Personal and not to be forced on friends.
In the last FEW months and weeks, there has been and continues to be an interesting drama taking place in the US Senate concerning The senate’s attempt at Immigration reform. This is known as senate bill S-1348. It was introduced again after initial failure using a new bill number S. 1639. This bill failed miserably after much calling and faxing by individual Americans.
I like so many other people have felt for a long time that our politicians and representatives were not really listening to the people they represent in most cases. This immigration reform was promoted as a sure thing, something most could agree on. However, as time went on, and more and more of us looked at details and then contacted their senators by telephone and fax a change took place.
It has been amazing that the position of many Senators has changed due to the silent majority ending our silence and letting them know how we feel. THE AMAZING THING I WITNESSED WAS THAT THEY ACTUALLY LISTENED, AND REACTED. Even Sam Brownback voted on Cloture later that Thursday afternoon. (He then took the low profile of not voting on this controversial issue when it failed 45-50 in the late afternoon session).
He was not the only senator to change his/her position in response to the communication from their constituents.
I am suggesting that you might want to let them know how you feel. Below are a couple links to an interesting video presentation. The one on the NumbersUSA website is complete, while the Utube version is shorter but easier to watch.
I personally do not want my Senators and/or Representatives to lump me into a group they only hear of through an organization of any type. I have made the decision to let them know who I am and what my position is on immigration. I also let them know that my support and most importantly my VOTE is CONDITIONED ON THE WAY THEY DO THEIR JOB!!
A good many of you have fax modems and programs on your pc. It might take a little time to enter the information in you “address book”, but can be extremely helpful in streamlining YOUR INDIVIDUAL communications.
Below are some numbers to reach Kansas Senators, by phone and by fax, along with links to locate your representatives in the House.
I feel that as usual the press is not telling us the details. Hopefully you will take a few minutes and look at the details, AND MORE IMPORTANT, let your senator and representative know your feeling on these important issues.
It’s been really great to discover that THEY ACTUALLY DO LISTEN IF THE VOICES ARE LOUD AND CONSISTANT.
Senator Sam Brownback contact information- Taken from his web site
Office location Phone # Fax #Washington DC office 1-202-224-6521 1-202-228-1265Overland Park Office 1-913-492-6378 1-913-492-7253Topeka office 1-785-233-2503 1-785-233-2616Garden City office 1-620-231-6040 1-620-231-6347Wichita office 1-316-264-8066 1-316-264-9078
Senator Pat Roberts Contact Information Taken from his web site
Washington DC office 1-202-224-4774 1-202-224-3514
Overland Park Office 1-913-451-9343 1-913-451-9446Topeka office 1-785-295-2745 1-785-235-3665Wichita office 1-316-263-0416 1-316-263-0273Dodge City Office 1-620-227-2244 1-620-227-2264
Representative Todd Tiahrt, Contact information taken from his web site
Wichita OfficeAddress: 155 North Market St.Suite 400Wichita, KS 67202Phone: 316.262.8992Fax: 316.262.5309Washington Office
Address: 2441 Rayburn BuildingWashington, DC 20515Phone: 202.225.6216Fax: 202.225.3489
8-31-07
Rep Tiahrt
H.R. 1940 is a good bill. I hope that you will support it and work with your colleagues on meaningful immigration reform.
In its Spring 2005 edition, the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons reported that “[b] between 300,000 and 350,000 anchor babies annually become citizens… In 2003 in Stockton, California, 70 percent of the 2,300 babies born in San Joaquin General Hospital’s maternity ward were anchor babies. …”
These staggering figures only tell part of the story. Birthright citizenship incentives illegal immigration by making anchor babies eligible to sponsor their illegal alien mothers and other relatives once they turn 21. In addition, at present, there is no formal policy that forbids DHS from deporting the illegal alien parents of a child born in the U.S. Yet in most cases, immigration officials habitually choose not to initiate removal proceedings, allowing the parents to remain in the U.S. illegally.
This is another MAGNET that encourages illegal immigration. It needs to be stopped now.
This is a serious problem that must be addressed. I trust that you will take the steps to limit automatic citizenship by supporting H.R. 1940.
The White House has promised two powerful reforms that will finally move illegal workers out of the workplace. Please support the “no-match letter” and “E-Verify” initiatives.
The goal of the business and illegal alien lobbies has always been to make the illegal alien population permanent, and to guarantee a steady stream of cheap, foreign labor. Until now, it looked like they had exclusive access to the government’s ear. But now that the Senate’s amnesty bill has died, more and more elected officials are listening to their constituents, and considering the “attrition through enforcement” solution as an alternative to amnesty.
Naturally, the business and pro-illegal-immigration lobby has mounted a vehement opposition to these new enforcement initiatives. They have resorted to name-calling and fear-mongering.
The fact is, the only people who have anything to fear from these enforcement initiatives are those who have broken the law. Even then, the initiatives leave room for the violators to make right, without prosecution. Employers have a window of opportunity to replace their illegal workers with legal immigrants or American citizens before any penalty is levied, and illegal workers are free to return to their native countries without any further punishment for violating our national sovereignty.
This is a fair and efficient way to deal with the 12 to 20 million illegal aliens in the country. No mass roundups will be necessary. At the same time, this is a long stride towards economic justice for the 23 million “less-educated” American working-age adults who do NOT have a job.
Please Do everything possible to support the “no-match letter” and “E-Verify” initiatives.
Senator Sam Brownback contact information- Taken from his web site
Office location Phone # Fax #Washington DC office 1-202-224-6521 1-202-228-1265Overland Park Office 1-913-492-6378 1-913-492-7253Topeka office 1-785-233-2503 1-785-233-2616Garden City office 1-620-231-6040 1-620-231-6347Wichita office 1-316-264-8066 1-316-264-9078
Senator Pat Roberts Contact Information Taken from his web site
Washington DC office 1-202-224-4774 1-202-224-3514
Overland Park Office 1-913-451-9343 1-913-451-9446Topeka office 1-785-295-2745 1-785-235-3665Wichita office 1-316-263-0416 1-316-263-0273Dodge City Office 1-620-227-2244 1-620-227-2264
Representative Todd Tiahrt, Contact information taken from his web site
Wichita OfficeAddress: 155 North Market St.Suite 400Wichita, KS 67202Phone: 316.262.8992Fax: 316.262.5309Washington Office
Address: 2441 Rayburn BuildingWashington, DC 20515Phone: 202.225.6216Fax: 202.225.3489
Apparently, the rule of law does not matter to certain posters on this blog:
“It doesn’t matter a bit of they are legal or not.”Posted by: Kev
And for every type of illegal act committed by a person, it is ALWAYS someone elses fault.
“who were enticed by employers- such as the meat packers and agri business- to sneak in here” Posted by: Kev
People don’t want to accept personal responsibility. Everything wrong in peoples lives is someone ELSE’s fault.
Society must enforce the rule of law in this country or we are heading for chaos and total disorder. Our society will encourage MORE illegal activity by making excuses for it. MORE illegals will find Kansas a warm and cozy home.
Individuals break the law. Hold all individuals accountable. The children of law breakers pay a price. That price should be being “exported” back to the homeland the parent came from, along with the parent(s).
The “meatpackers” individual owners or employee responsible for hiring illegal aliens should also be held accountable.
But you don’t have the courts or the legislature write or rule on laws, which make acception to illegal activity.
acception = exception
American Way, Kev has never made a mistake in his entire life. It’s always someone else’s fault. (Usually a Republican or Bush himself is the one to blame.)
It’s not enough to have Socialism just in America.
We need Global Worldwide Dominant Socialism, so that hard working American taxpayers pay for the entire World of deadbeats.
Thus, illegal immigrant kids should get all the benefits of American Socialism, whether they are here legally or not.
The law does not matter.
So, we may now pick and choose which laws we will follow or not follow.
I’m choosing to stop paying Federal and State taxes.
Max,
What you describe (worldwide socialism) is inevitable – it’s predicted in the Bible.
Is Hillary or Obama the Unified World Leader – The Anti-Christ?
A Child born in Kansas is a legal citizen of the U.S. and a legal resident of Kansas. That Child is therefore eligible for in-state tuition to any of the State universities. Unless you change the laws about “anchor babies” this is the law of the land. And the rule of that law is that those children of illegal immigrants are indeed citizens, and just as eligible for in-state tuition as the red-headed freckle faced kid next door.
It might not SEEM fair, but then again, those children of illegals didnt ASK to be born here either.
Yep time for a beer and bed…
Posted by: Chas. | September 01, 2007 at 02:08 AM
Damn, Chas must have some social life. Up all day up all night. All on the WEBLOG.
A beer, his right first, and his keyboard is entertainment for life?
Some of the illegal alien kids involved here were not born in this country. There’s a fairness issue here. Why should a kid who was not born in this country pay lower tuition to go to a Kansas college than say, a kid from Oklahoma? A foreign-born has more rights than an American?
XXX, if the young person who was born in Oklahoma, then comes to Kansas, attends a Kansas high school for at least three years, graduates from a Kansas high school (or obtains a GED), applies to a Regents’ University and is charged nonresident tuition, then that student has standing, according to the 10th Circuit, to sue.
If a foreign-born student whose parents are here illegally does NOT complete at least three years in a Kansas High School and who does not graduate from a Kansas High School (or does not obtain a GED in Kansas), applies to a Regents’ University, that student is NOT entitled to resident tuition, according to the law in question, thereby being treated equally with the Oklahoma student in your example.
I believe that is what the 10th Circuit is saying in affirming the lower court in this matter.
Given the three year attendance and graduation requirement for the children of illegal aliens to be eligible for resident tuition at a Regents’ institution (and be on the path to becoming a citizen), this is a bit more onerous than, say, a family from Oklahoma (to use XXX’s example) moving to Kansas (for job reasons, e.g.) between said student’s junior and senior year in high school, establishing residence in Kansas, the student attends a Kansas high school for one year, graduates; s/he is then entitled to resident tuition in Kansas at a Regents’ institution, and, (not being knowledgeable about Oklahoma law) in all likelihood, would be charged non-resident tuition in an Oklahoma public institution of higher education.
The purpose of these two posts is to illustrate that the law in question does not automatically grant the child of an illegal alien resident tuition at a Kansas Regents’ school just because s/he is in Kansas.
“XXX, if the young person who was born in Oklahoma,
If a foreign-born student whose parents are here illegally does NOT complete at least three years in a Kansas High School. ” Vaughn Tolle
VT: What about a foreign-born student who HAS three years in Kansas?
Is that covered too? The later situation is an illegal.
American Way, I guess I wasn’t clear; sorry. The statute states that if the student has completed at least 3 years in a Kansas high school, has graduated from a Kansas high school (or obtained a GED in Kansas) and s/he (the student) is on the path to citizenship, the student who is the child of an illegal alien is eligible for resident tuition. Obviously, said student must meet the other requirements for admission (21 or greater on ACT or top 1/3 graduating class or 2.5 or greater on Regents’ Recommended Curriculum) to a Regents’ school.
I saw some discussion of taking grants away from citizens above. To the extent the financial aid in the form of grants is a Pell Grant, an SEOG, or the new AEOG, first and foremost requirement is that the citizen be a citizen of the U.S. Other requirements include that if the student is a male, he has registered with Selective Service; no drug convictions for all; certain income requirements; etc. I point this out as for most of the students that I (generalizing here, of course) see possibly benefiting from the statute, it is this type of aid (not merit aid) that, if the student was a citizen, s/he would qualify for; if the student isn’t a citizen, s/he won’t qualify for it, thus I don’t see how his/her admission would take grant money away from students who are citizens.
There are more grants than just Pel grants. More monies to be had other than what the university offers through the Federal or State Government.
Just bleed your little heart out to one of the Socialistic scholarship grantors and money is your.
minority, illegal alien child = instant dollars for college – a socialists dream
Tried to see if one must be a citizen to qualify for Perkins Student Loans and Stafford Student Loans (subsidized and unsubsidized), another “federal” component of need based student financial aid. I can’t tell from the cursory review of the information I looked at. My “gut” says the student must be a citizen to be eligible for these types of aid, which is based upon the citizenship question contained on the FAFSA (which determines eligibility for “federal” student aid, and in many cases, for institutional student financial aid).
Kansas, I’m aware of many PRIVATELY funded programs for minority aid, and a few which are publicly funded. As I don’t have any particulars about citizenship/legal alien status as a requirement for same, cannot comment on your thoughts other than to say if the programs are privately funded, the same don’t meet my definition of socialism.
Seems to me we might be better off having these kids in university, than off working in another packing plant, or putting on another roof… or working street crews for Tornejo…
Evidently Vaughn illegal aliens using anchor babies to abuse the system doesn’t bother you.
Why don’t we just give the entire country of Mexico, Central and South America, in state residency charges and be done with it.
Give them free housing and food as well.oops nm on that last one, we do that already.
Having put all my children through KU, I am familiar with the requirements for grants and loans. The FAFSA(?) form was a monster. They ask for everything about your income, investments, savings, etc.. Everything except blood type. An SS number was required from both parents. (my kids didn’t qualify, but that’s another sad story)
I believe the FAFSA is mandatory -before applying for grants/loans.
So I don’t see how an illegal could apply for an illegal child.Some exception to providing an SS? for Illegals applying for legal, I don’t know.
However: In addition to FEDERAL funds, the great state of Kansas kicked in grants based upon my childrens test scores (SAT/ACT), and/or grades.
No one asked if we were US Citizens in applying nor for our identification. It was based upon the merits of the child.
So an illegal child (born foreign) could apply for state grants, without detection.
Not so sure on residential tuition for same. “on the path….” is open ended.
KANSAS — Any Child born in the United States is a CITIZEN… Just like all the rest of us citizns… Those KIDS didnt ask to be born of illegal alien parents.. Why would you want to discriminate against them?? THEY have all the same rights as the rest of us US Born folks… Like it or not, THEY are citizens…
I agree, Chas. I recall reading that in the three (now to be four) years that the statue has been in effect, there has been a total of 171 students qualify thereunder. As I’m sure you recall, Chas., from one of my earlier posts, the students still must meet the “qualified admissions” requirements to be admitted.
To add to the requirements posted upthread; there is a 10% “set aside” for students who do not meet the qualified admissions standards. It is my understanding that in the majority of cases, these “slots” are taken by ’student-athletes’ who are eligible under the even more laughable NCAA rules for athletic scholarships, but who do not otherwise meet the qualified admissions standards (such as they are).
Seems to me we might be better off having these illegal kidsshipped back to the country of origin with their parents.
INS isn’t doing their job.
Yep, I’m with you on that Vaughn… And I believe that babies born in this country would qualify for in-state tuition in ANY state for state universities..
My daughter just recently moved from Illinois (eligible for state tuition) to Oklahoma (not eligible for state tuition for I think 3 years) She erroneously thought it was just 6 months…
Now she either has to apply for scholarship funds, or possibly Pell Grant funds, to go to OK State…
American Way, the grants to which you refer are merit based, not need based. Since both our girls attend(ed) school out of state in private colleges, I’m not at all familiar with the criteria surrounding the merit based programs. As I noted in a sweeping generalization above, I don’t think most of the students covered by the resident tuition program at issue likely qualify for the same.
Yep, the FAFSA is a bear, especially the first time…..
Sandy, that point is the 800 lb. gorilla sitting in the living room, on the immigration reform bill… How do you send back 12 million illegals?? I have no clue…
However, I DO believe that it might be to some benefit to get as many “anchor babies” into universities as possible… They would have a better life, and be able to carry their share, on SS payments, and IRS payments, etc.
At least they could put back some of what they might have gotten, due to the illegal status of their parents…
Yes, Chas., the states are quite restrictive on resident tuition rules as your daughter has learned. The Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution does, as you imply, grant citizenship status to any person born in the U.S. This, as the illegal alien mother from Chicago learned recently, doesn’t grant the illegal alien parent(s) any special rights (nor should it, in my opinion). It merely means that should the parent(s) be deported, the child, if s/he also goes with the parents, is a citizen, free on his/her own to enter the U.S. as a citizen, be entitled to a U.S. passport, and once an adult, to come to the U.S. (if not here already) as a citizen and to begin the necessary procedures for the parents to come lawfully at some point in the future.
There are two types of students from illegal immigrants.
I don’t see anyone in the thread disputing US citizens attending higher educational facilities like anyone else.
Provided they qualify for admissions, like anyone else.
For many of the others, just graduating High School, or GED, is a huge hurdle… I am still not quite sure how an illegal gets a verifiable SS number to use when applying to a university… And that part of the Court ruling does bother me… But, at a different level, I still feel that at least some of these illegal kids would be better off attending university, than out beating the pavement, in gang trouble, or just working meal ticket to meal ticket… Maybe the best we can do for the illegal children is get them(or keep them) in the education system…
And for the Republicans, I think IIRC, Former AG Gonzalez’ father was a migrant worker. I dont know if that implies he was illegal or not… But certainly not university educated…
Perhaps instead of just straight tuition for the illegal children, there could/should be some kind of work/study program set up for them, so that they are in effect, earning their tuition… ??? Just a thought??
BTW, Vaughn, I am a HUGE sports fan… always have been… But I agree with you 100% on the huge qualifying gap standares for student athletes, that comes thru NCAA… There really needs to be some kind of reforms in those situations as well…
Maybe if NCAA did that, it might prevent future Michael Vick scenarios… or Ray Lewis, or etc, etc.
Perhaps instead of just straight tuition for the illegal children, there could/should be some kind of airplane ticket set up for them, so that they are in effect, flown back to where they snuck into our country from ??? Just a thought??
Chas., as laughable as I think the Prop 48 (original name, now Prop 42 or something else) requirements are, the same are better than what existed when I matriculated at KU in 1968, which, IIRC, required only a high school diploma. Of course, back then, Freshmen were not eligible to compete.
While there are issues within NCAA Division III, the rule there of no athletic scholarships makes sense to me. In other words, the “student-athlete” must otherwise be qualified for admission to the school, and participation in athletics is a true extra-curricular activity. This won’t happen, given just how big the business of competitive inter-collegiate athletics has become; but, if it would happen, then the NFL and NBA would be forced to set up minor league systems, and bear the cost thereof in some form, rather than the colleges and universities providing these services at no cost to the pro leagues.
BTW, I’m a big sports fan, too; there’s nothing quite like a D-III game. Yes, the skill level is quite lacking, relative to D-I and D-II; but, for intense, competitive games, D-III does not take a back seat to anyone.
I also firmly believe that if athletic scholarships were eliminated, there might be a few more students in high schools who concentrated on academics as well. Again, “pie in the sky”, or should I say “pi in the sky”. :-)
Related news:
“Judge Puts Hold on White House Plan to Warn Employers About Hiring IllegalsA federal judge has put a halt on a planned White House crackdown on employers who hire illegal immigrants while she considers a lawsuit filed by the AFL-CIO claiming the move would harm citizens and those working in the U.S. legally, the Washington Post reported on Saturday.The ruling, issued by U.S. District Judge Maxine M. Chesney, bars the Department of Homeland Security from sending mail notices to 140,000 employers about suspect Social Security numbers.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/31/AR2007083101900.html?wpisrc=newsletter
So I guess it’s not just BIG BUSINESS supporting illegal immigration, but organized labor as well.Who’s hand is who’s pocket?
Looking at Hotdog1’s link, the judge issued a temporary restraining order to give the court time to consider the merits of the litigation filed by the AFL-CIO.
If the court determines the suit is without merit, then the letters may fly. This just delays them (at best) until after a hearing set for October 1.
Interestingly, while not filing litigation, from the article there is a business group who requested a 180 day delay in implementation together with answers to 80 questions submitted to the government on the general issue.
Some of what the AFL-CIO complains of, along with ACLU, and by inference, the business community, seems to me to be founded in concern over the Social Security Administration data base to be used for the program. Self-admitted by the SSA, the data base has an error rate of at least 10%. (Extracted from reading the link).
The COURTS are supporting illegal immigration!
The Judge,(is he not sworn to uphold the law and defend the Constitution) is ruling that the LAW should NOT be enforced!
Pretty soon we will have pure anarchy.
(Go buy your guns now, if you haven’t already – before Hillary bans them)
Max, I guess you are referring to the action of the judge posted by Hotdog1. The judge is not making such a ruling on a permanent basis; she merely issued a 60 day TRO so the merits of the litigation could be considered.
BTW, the “law” here in question is in the form of an Executive Order and regulations issued by DHS. Just for clarification.
Everyone’s missing the point here. The illegal kids shouldn’t be in Kansas Schools to begin with.
If a public school enrolls an illegal, they then have information on a crime that has been committed. They should be required by LAW to report such criminals for immediate deportation.
Public schools exist on taxpayer monies and as such should be bound by the law.
Children who are enrolled in school are required to give SS numbers. If one comes back as a fake – immediate crime reporting.
Let’s get tough on these criminals, folks. There is no reason they should be able to get in-state tuition – instead the colleges should report them for deportation.
Let’s make it happen.
GSheridan,
So I’m clear on this, you are proposing the entities of the state government become the first line of enforcement of federal immigration law? Would you, as part of your proposal, provide for reimbursement to the states and the entities thereof for all costs incurred by the states and entities by the federal government? Or, would your proposal include placing an INS agent in each school district, public college and university?
I’m one who believes that laws on immigration and the enforcement thereof is one which is the responsibility of the federal government. Thus, my questions.
Another thought; as, under the Administration proposal, the employer of someone whose SSN does not “match” the records of the data base maintained by SSA 90 days to “clear this up”, should not schools, et al., be permitted the same time? If the business group cited in the article linked above by Hotdog1 decries the burden on employers by this short period, are not the schools, etc. placed under the same burden, at least, by your proposal?
It is actually to our society’s benefit that our laws allow children of illegal immigrants who meet the requirements to attend college at in-state tuition. Why?First, these kids are here, and they are not at fault for their status. They were brought here by their parents and had no say in the matter.
Second, many of them were so young when brought here that they don’t even remember their parents’ home countries. They are thoroughly Americanized and speak English fluently.
Third, most would not attend college at all without the law, so the state is receiving money from them paying in-state tuition that it would otherwise not get at all. US citizen out-of-state students’ situations would not change if the law were to be repealed – they would still pay out-of-state tuition. Also, out-of-state students can get in-state tuition in the states in which they grew up or resided during high school. (Or they can move to the state where they want to go to school and meet its residency requirements, thus qualifying for in-state tuition.) It is not as though US citizens cannot get in-state tuition anywhere.
Fourth, short of creating a police-state and/or spending hundreds of billions of dollars (what it would really cost) to round up and deport everyone here illegally, the kids are here. Do we want them remaining in the shadows in poverty or near-poverty, paying a smaller amount of taxes because the jobs they get as adults don’t pay much, or do we want them to have an education so they can better themselves, get legal and get better jobs, thus getting out of poverty and paying higher taxes into our economy?
I cannot see how this provision to facilitate education for those who qualify could be harmful to our society. We are not talking about adults who come here illegally just to go to college. We are talking about kids (whose immigration status is not their fault) who are here, grow up here, are smart, and have potential. Many are scholars in high school. If given the chance, they will contribute meaningfully to our society.
In most cases, these children do not have the option of going back to their parents’ home countries to pursue legal entry, and they likely don’t speak enough of the parents’ home language to survive there anyway. Most of them speak about as much of their parents’ native language as the typical US citizen would after taking a year of high school foreign language — not much.This is a humane law that addresses reality and is beneficial to our state.
If illegals want in-state tuition then let’s make everyone in their family become US citizens by doing it the proper, legal way. The issue to me is that US citizenship is more than just about getting in-state tuition. It also means participating in funding our country through our taxes.
If it is proven that the illegals in colleges are coming from households that are using fake ID’s, fake social security numbers and etc – then that is when laws have been broken. Let’s deal with the problem at that time.
Why just throw our hands up in the air as if it is a losing battle?
I do not begrudge anybody wanting a college education and I would not start just because they are illegals. There has to be a better way to deal with this situation. Maybe the colleges need to stop have out-of-state tuition rates being different than in-state tuition. That would make everyone happy then and I’m sure the colleges will make up the tuition loss by hitting the taxpayers for more ‘repair money’ for their falling down campuses.
But, mm, if the public colleges do not charge a differential between residents and nonresidents, and charge all the same, mm, as private colleges do, then is there any justification for public colleges? That is, if the cost of tuition is the same for residents and nonresidents, then why should the residents of a particular state support the public colleges via taxes, be they property, income, sales, or otherwise.
If we convert all colleges, then, to private schools, it would seem to me that then the schools would be free to set their admissions standards to whatever level desired. Thus, no more admission to a school based upon being a resident, meeting (such as is the case at KU) a lower standard than that applied to nonresidents.
But we stray from the topic. There are some who don’t want children of illegals (even if the children are citizens, from what I can tell) to benefit from resident tuition at a Kansas public college or university. There are some who would limit this to those offspring of illegal aliens who are citizens by virtue of being born in the U.S. There are those who look merely at the residence requirements supplied by the statute (together with the “path to citizenship” requirement) and find nothing wrong with it (the statute).
Clearly, there is no consensus here.
KANSAS — Any Child born in the United States is a CITIZEN… Just like all the rest of us citizns..”
Fine, let’s invite Al Qaeda children in by the hundreds of thousands then.
Or do you prefer certain shades of brown over the other?
Illegal immigrants DO pay taxes that help fund our schools. School funding comes from property taxes, and everyone pays those. Either you own property and pay the taxes directly, or you rent property, and your landlord pays the taxes out of your rent payments. Only a foolish landlord would not figure the property tax payments into the rent payments he charges his tennants.
Unless the illegal immigrants are homeless living under a bridge and sending their kids to school from there (which I highly doubt), they are helping to pay for the schools they use.
If you really want to see the costs involved, why not petition the Kansas government to do a study on the economic effects of the illegal immigrants in our state? I called the Kansas Comptroller’s office to ask if such a study had been done, and they said no. They also said they had no plans to do one. I think they should. I think it would be enlightening for everyone.
Every state that I know of who has done such a study has found that illegal immigrants actually contribute more into the state economy than they use in services such as schools, infrastructure, etc. — even when you figure in public assistance and prisons costs.
Look at the report the State of Texas did, and they have a much larger percentage of their population as illegal immigrants than does Kansas. Texas found that while illegal immigrants cost the state $1.16 billion, they contributed $1.58 billion. That is a net benefit of $420 million, folks. If I remember correctly, North Carolina, Arizona, and one other state I can’t remember the name of found the same thing — the numbers were different, but the cost factor was still smaller than the intake. I believe in Arizona’s case the discrepency was actually quite huge.
Let’s put up a sign in Wichita.
Illegal Aliens, birth your children here.
or
If you change your mind, Tiller can scrape them out for you.
okay Julie,
Let’s just open up all the borders, no passport check, just walk right in.
Julie, you point out the basis upon which the litigation reported failed, namely that ruling the statute in question unconstitutional on Equal Protection grounds would not change the status of the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs would still be nonresidents, charged nonresident tuition. As Phillip Brownlee pointed out, if the plaintiffs want the same treatment, they need to meet the same requirements (with the exception of the “path to citizenship” requirement, as the plaintiffs were presumably citizens). If, then, they were denied resident tuition, at that point they have an Equal Protection claim.
Kansas, to change the law stating that being born in the US makes you a citzen would require a change in the Consituion, very hard to do.
plaintiffs being united States citizens born of united States parents.
Don’t you love lawyer talk?
It makes everything look so sanitized.
I bet it wouldn’t be very hard to do Tom Paine.
Just adding that foreign people illegally in the united states giving birth to a child while being in illegal status cannot get conveyed United States Citizenship status.
See how easy that is?
I bet it would pass 80 percent to 20 percent easily under a Constitutional change.
It would also be interesting, Julie, if the state has any data on the numbers of suspected illegals with high school age children who have migrated to Kansas since 2004. This would, I surmise, need to be an estimate.
It would also be interesting if there were any data on births to illegal aliens in Kansas. If there is, I speculate the loci for many of these would be around Garden City and Dodge City.
On your 80/20 comment, Kansas, are you referring to the Congress, the states ratifying, or both?
Kansas(?),The hem of your white sheet is showing!
I’ve spent my life getting to know people who were born in places I’d never get the chance to see. I’ve known many fine people who came here from Mexico and points south. They aren’t the ones we should worry about. What we need is an impenetrable wall all along our southern border to keep those damn Okies and Texans out of our state. They’ll ruin us for sure!
Actually, Kansas, reading your proposal, it, as you worded the same, adds nothing to the Constitution. But, I suspect you really meant that children born of those in the country illegally not being entitled to citizenship merely by virtue of being born in the U.S.
Yeah Jed, I’ve know many fine people from Mexico too, but they came here LEGALLY!
Go to Europe and try the crap they are doing to the United States. Europe does not allow it!
You Libs are giving away the hen with the eggs!
Soon, there will be no freebies for you Libs to give away because you insists on giving away national treasure and resources to ILLEGAL ALIENS and their offspring.
So how many students are actually in the whole illegal immigrant school tuition scenario. I cant see it being that large, but isn’t better for the state in the long run to have an educated work force, It would make sense for the federal government to find ways to put such children on a path to legalization, perhaps military service as a path to citizenship?
Yes Vaughn Exactly, just like most European countries have it.
For instance, a child of of a service member born in Germany CANNOT claim German citizenship.
They must register the child with the American Consulate and be register as an American Citizen.
Tom Paine,
As posted upthread, in the print article I recall the number as being 171 in Kansas.
The proposal to place the noncitizen children of illegals on the path to citizenship by service in the military is being discussed as a way to alleviate recruiting problems (from an article I read somewhere in this great cyberworld within the past two weeks).
Well, Kansas, I’d suggest that the analogy isn’t perfect, given that the presence of U.S. forces in Germany isn’t in violation of German law, but I understand your point. My wife was born in Canada to a member of the USAF serving there; her birth had to be registered as you point out, but a difference between Canadian and German law on the topic; she had a right to choose to be a Canadian citizen upon reaching adulthood, as I understand it, and did not.
Yes, Kansas, they can… and they DO… IF they are born in a German hospital, and not on a U.S. Base… I have a cousin who was so born… At age 18 he had to decide if his citizenship was to be German, or USA… IF they are born ON BASE or ON POST, then they are considered US Citizens
Speaking of the numbers, as the Vocational Colleges are now under the aegis of the Board of Regents, I wonder if there is any breakdown of the number between such and the four year schools?
Interesting how SOME people think the commission of one misdemeanor automatically turns people into the scum of the Earth.
But enough about Larry Craig.
LOL Rage
Interesting, Chas. That’s why my wife had the choice, as she was born in a Canadian military hospital in Newfoundland, not in a U.S. military hospital located on a U.S. installation.
Vaughn, I think that is the distinction… I have seen that a number of different times… but only once in my own family…
What I was saying that Europe doesn’t tolerate illegal aliens in their countries. Nor will they give exception to it under any circumstance including birth.
Of course, if you want to play it safe and take the Illegal Alien side which won, be my guest.
It’s a much easier win you don’t have to defend the spirit of the law for immigration, you can just lay down in the lounge chair of Liberalism and take it with a cervesa.
In Seminary, we had two students… one from Tanzania, and one from Namibia… They were BORN in the US, instead of in the infirmaies of their countries…
They were, of course, automatically US Citizens… But their own countries gave them the choice of citizenship when they turned 18… The man from Tanzania chose to remain a US Citizen, even though raised in Tanzania… The Namibian chose to be a citizen of Namibia… The Namibian died in a civil war in his home country after graduating Seminary. The Tanzanian pursued Doctoral studies, and now teaches in university in Tanzania…
Both interesting stories…
Note: Both mens’ parents were in Embassy service for their own native nations…
Yes, Chas., I think that (citizenship) issue is likely handled under the applicable SOFA (Status of Forces Agreement) between the two countries.
Kansas, I’d suggest that in the court decision that is the topic of the thread the “winner” was the law enacted in Kansas.
Well, it’s been fun; off to home to enjoy the rest of the long weekend. Everyone stay safe.
Thanks for the input Vaughn!! Have a great weekend!!
If both parents are foreign nationals in the case of most Americans stationed in Germany, the child only has German citizenship automatically from birth if one or more of the parents has been legally living in Germany for a period of 8 years and has a settlement permit (”Niederlassungserlaubnis”) or is an EU citizen entitled to freedom of movement.
American Military do not qualify for a settlement permit as they are guests of Germany via the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA.)
There are also cases where citizenship has been denied when people tried to use the married to a German citizen scam. The German government frowns upon this and has very strict laws of arranged marriages for the purpose of obtaining citizen for either themselves or their children.
Ok Kansas you can have the last word… there is no arugment there anyway…
“”"In Seminary, we had two students… one from Tanzania, and one from Namibia… They were BORN in the US, instead of in the infirmaies of their countries…
They were, of course, automatically US Citizens… But their own countries gave them the choice of citizenship when they turned 18… The man from Tanzania chose to remain a US Citizen, even though raised in Tanzania… The Namibian chose to be a citizen of Namibia… The Namibian died in a civil war in his home country after”"”"
Actually both would have remained US citizens by virtue of the fact they were born here. Your citizenship in the USA is not cancelled because you become a citizen of another nation. There are many dual and even triple citizens in the USA.
The topic concerning the college in-state tuition for children of those here illegally has very little to do with what is mostly being argued about here now. It doesn’t fit neatly into the category of “general amnesty” because these children did not do anything wrong. They just “are.” They did not break any laws to get here — their parents did.
Neither does the topic have to do with so-called “anchor babies.” That term is supposed to apply only to those whose mothers darted across the border just to give birth, not to those whose parents lived here for months and even years before they were born. Besides, any child born here is a US citizen anyway (not counting diplomats), and the college law deals only with children who do not have the proper papers to be here, not those who were born here.
In spite of believing it is in our society’s best interest to allow children who were brought here illegally by their parents to qualify for in-state tuition at state colleges if they meet certain residency and graduation requirements (as well as proving they are in the process of legalizing their status), that has nothing to do with whether or not I am a fan of open borders, as someone has suggested.
Actually, I am not a fan of open borders. We need to know and control who is entering our country. I also think we should enforce the laws against employers who hire illegal immigrants.
But ALONG WITH securing our borders and truly enforcing the laws against hiring illegal immigrants, we also need to deal realistically and humanely with the people who are already here.
You can’t just get tough or just give amnesty. One-sided “fixes” won’t work, and both exploit people when done alone. Comprehensive reform is necessary, and by comprehensive I mean comprehensive — we have to address all sides of the issue.
The current immigration laws are illogical and unrealistic. The current quotas are so low as to be laughable and do not come anywhere close to meeting employment demands. If we want people to be here legally, then we need to clamp down on border security and go after employers AND change the laws to give a reasonable number of people the chance to enter legally.
Right now, there are not enough people in this country to fill all the jobs. If it weren’t for illegal immigration, we’d have even more labor shortages than we do now. I do not for one second think things should remain as they now are. Lots of people get exploited under the current broken system. But if we want to crack down on employers who hire illegal immigrants, we also need to make sure we are allowing enough legal immigrants into the country to meet the labor demands.
People scream about immigrants (either legal or illegal) taking jobs away from Americans, but if you look at the real facts that research economists and legitimate research groups tell us (as opposed to the “facts” made up by anti-immigrant groups masquerading as legitimate research groups), you will see that we are indeed facing historically low levels of unemployment and high labor shortages due to the aging of our population and declining number of young people.
And even if you do not want to support “amnesty” for people you consider to be scum-bag lawbreakers, why is it so hard for some to see that children brought here by their parents do not morally fall into such a category? They did nothing wrong. And even if our labor shortage were not as great as it is, would it still not be better for everyone to have such children be able to legalize their status, get an education, and become productive members of our society?
Kev makes a good point. An 8 year old born in America whose mother was deported to Mexico has decided to live there, and received a Mexican passport, i.e. Mexican citizenship. But he’s still an American citizen because his parents are Mexican citizens. So he has dual citizenship.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/latinamerica/la-fg-son1sep01,0,2049272.story?coll=la-home-center
“”"My wife was born in Canada to a member of the USAF serving there; her birth had to be registered as you point out, but a difference between Canadian and German law on the topic; she had a right to choose to be a Canadian citizen upon reaching adulthood, as I understand it, and did not.”"”"
Your wife doesn’t “choose” to be a Canadian citizen. Canada is a jus soli nation like the United States. Anybody born in Canada or in a Canadian registered sea or air vessel after 1947 IS a Canadian citizen unless they are born to foreign diplomats that carry diplomatic immunity. Both my wife and my children are citizens of Canada. Even the child born in the USA is a citizen of Canada because his parent (my wife) is a citizen of Canada. Of course he is a citizen of the USA too. Unless your wife has actively renounced her citizenship in Canada, she remains a citizen of Canada and may carry a Canadian passport or immigrate there anytime she might wish.
I too am not a total “open borders” person with respect to Mexico. I think that the borders need to be secured and that every US citizen should be issued a tamper proof biometric ID card. And I think that employer caught with even a single illegal alien should be fined and criminally charged. But at the same time, people need to recognize the need for a general amnesty for those that are here, working and paying taxes and not in trouble with the law. And when I say “amnesty” I mean we will give you a Permanent Resident card only and that, if you want US Citizenship, you go home and apply for it and get in line with everybody else. The fact is that we have a booming economy that is creating millions of new jobs. There simply are not enough of us to fill them as the native population is having fewer and fewer babies and getting older. We are going to need to import millions of workers to keep our economy humming in the future and many of these new jobs are low paying labour intensive service and construction jobs- the kind of “hot and dirty” work that most of us do not wish to do. And, while it is bad enough that cons (who claim to be “Christian” mostly) want to pick on little kids and deny them an education. I don’t think we really want to discourage the Mexicans from going to school do we? Do we want millions of uneducated Mexican angry gang members running the streets of the country? Why is it that the CONS and Republicans almost never think about the consequences of what they are doing? Are they really that STUPID?? Of course they didn’t think about Iraq before they did it either so why would I expect anything different here…
The Kansas statute seems very thorny to me.
One of the plaintiff appellants, who attended high school in Iowa, subsequently lived in Kansas for six years, and paid state income for three. But she had to pay non-resident tuition (1.5 x state-resident tuition, not 2x, due to an interstate compact between Kansas, Nebraska, Missouri and Iowa).
State-resident tuition is a subsidy: it means that half the instructional costs are born by Kansas taxpayers.
Given the relatively low incomes of Latino immigrant workers, and being overwhelmingly of child bearing age, illegal-alien parents do not pay sufficient taxes to cover the costs of their children’s K-12 education at $6000+ per child per year. Take $6000 x 13 years x 3 kids = $234,000. A Latino couple that owns or rents a 1200 square foot house won’t pay $40,000 in property taxes in their lifetimes.
So with Kansas citizens footing 80% of typical immigrant families’ K-12 education, are Kansans obligated to pay for their higher education as well?
Bear in mind that most native-born Kansans do not have college degrees. A college education is not a state-constitution guaranteed right: the opportunity to pursue one is, but obviously without adequate financial aid funding, the opportunity is often illusory. Unlike a K-12 education, a higher education must be paid for by its recipients, even with taxpayer subsidization.
I’m not saying subsidization of illegal aliens’ college education is flatly wrong, because many of the recipients will remain in the state, and as first generation to college students, many will choose service professions, such as nursing and teaching, two fields that have large labor shortages.
However, is it fairer to apply the aliens’ tuition subsidies to provide more need-based scholarships to deserving, but socieconomically-disadvantaged Kansas citizen students? How do we argue against this in favor of people, who according to federal law (1986 Immigration Reform Act) are not qualified for amnesty, and are supposed to be deported by federal authorities, who are clearly not doing their job?
Personally, I believe that in a situation where all students are accomodatable, helping illegal aliens is smart economic and social policy. But I can’t see preferentially favoring them over our young citizens, in a condition of limited education funds, that precludes accomodation of many of our own young citizens.
Importantly too, absent amnesty legislation, many of the aliens may be unable to find lawful employment after earning their degrees. At present, this is a potential problem.
The proposal that illegal aliens joining the armed forces be given a quick pathway to citizenship appears to be very sensible. They would serve the country and earn citizen rights and privileges, and would notably receive higher-education stipends from the armed forces, typically 1 year’s state university tuition for every 1 year of service, plus books costs, and a housing stipend. They would also be fully eligible for Pell Grants, Stafford loans and other federal and state financial aid.
Illegals are illegal plus they pay no taxes and are only a huge burden we all have to carry on our backs to give them free medical care and now cheap tuition for when our own children can not affort higher education. I would pay higher taxes to deport the illegals asap!
As I said MPS, the courts and the Libs are giving away the hens with the eggs.
No common sense at all.
Not all Latinos/Hispanics are here illegally. Not all people here illegally are Hispanic/Latino, either. A lot of people seem to forget this.
Also, quite a few of those here illegally are married to those who ARE here legally. Lots of people who are here legally or are US citizens are low-income and have several kids in the school system, and lots of people who pay high property taxes do not have any children in the system — either because their kids are grown or because they just don’t have any kids (or perhaps they are in private schools). That’s the way the system is set up, so people who don’t make as much money CAN have access to public education. This was deliberately done so we would not end up with an rich elite class that had a monopoly on education.
Illegal immigrants DO pay taxes — far more taxes than people think. Not only do they pay property taxes (either directly or through rent) and sales tax whenever they buy things, the majority of them also pay state and federal taxes. Many of them overpay taxes but never ask for refunds.
The SSA reports that it has $420 billion (yes, that’s with a B) received from people assumed to be here illegally and who are not in a position to claim that money, and that number is still mushrooming. Do you really think that money it is just sitting there, or is it dipped into to help stay in the black? I saw figures that for 2001 the IRS received $305 million from people assumed to be here illegally.
It has been calculated that the average illegal immigrant will pay about $80,000 in federal taxes alone over the course of his lifetime. That does not count local taxes nor does it count state taxes.
I still think the state of Kansas ought to do an audit to see what the actual economic effects are from the illegal immigrants estimated to be here. I think it would show that they put more into the system than they use. Other states who have done this audit have found that, even states like Texas and Arizona that have a far larger percentage of illegal immigrants in their population than does Kansas.
Why is it such a persistent myth that illegal immigrants pay no taxes? Look at the facts. We are happy to take their money and their sweat in dirty jobs few of us want to do, but we also want the right to demonize them, lie about them, and some of us, I don’t doubt, would like to hurt or kill them, from the tone of a lot of the things I hear people say. They are people not unlike us, and we should never forget that either.
I’m sure all those illegal immigrants file a Federal and State Income Tax form right Julie?
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,272061,00.html
KANSAS CITY, Mo. — Uncle Sam might be willing to give refunds to illegal immigrants who have paid more than their share of federal income taxes, but Missouri and Kansas aren’t so generous.
Tax officials in the two states insist that taxpayers provide accurate information on their returns in order to get a refund, if one is due. But often, workers who are in the country illegally use a false Social Security number, then provide additional tax information when filing a return, reports The Kansas City (Mo.) Star.
For the feds, having an Individual Taxpayer Identification Number — created in 1996 for those without Social Security numbers to ensure every worker pays income taxes — attached to a return is enough even if there’s a false Social Security number listed on the W-2 form.
From 1996 to 2003, people who filed returns using an ITIN contributed $48 billion to the U.S. Treasury and received $23 billion in refunds. In 2005, the IRS received 1.6 million ITIN applications, the most since 1996.
In Missouri, the Department of Revenue won’t process a return if the worker uses an ITIN and attaches a W-2, said Jim Brentlinger, the department’s tax bureau administrator.
In those cases, the state sends the worker a letter requesting documentation for why the return doesn’t have the Social Security number that is on the W-2.
The department doesn’t know how much tax money is collected from illegal immigrants or how much refund money isn’t being paid out.
“When someone has gained employment with a Social Security number that’s not their own, (the department) has no way to verify that that Social Security number belongs to them or that the money withheld by the employer was withheld for this employee,” Brentlinger said. “Department of Revenue doesn’t have an issue with immigration or employment — just data that has been submitted to us doesn’t match.”
In the past decade, the Kansas Department of Revenue has received 41,000 returns using ITINs, said Bev Ries, the department’s public service administrator.
When the department receives an ITIN return seeking a refund based on income from a W-2, the state sends a letter to the employer requesting documentation that the person who filed the tax return is the same person who earned the wages.
But even if the employer confirms the identity of the person who presented the Social Security number, it still doesn’t count as validation because the W-2 has a Social Security number and the return has an ITIN, Ries said.
A spokeswoman with the national Federation of Tax Administrators said the position taken by Missouri and Kansas makes sense.
“What’s the state going to do?” said Verenda Smith, government affairs associate with the federation. “States cannot issue refunds for anyone who asks for it. If you did, that would just be opening the doors to the state bank and saying, `Here, guys, come on in.”‘
For one Julie 48 billion seems a lot less than your 420 billion.
Perhaps you adjusted for inflation?
Oh and about those stolen SSA Numbers? You still think illegal aliens are such swell people.
If you have an ITN, the only numbers illegal aliens can get, then you can’t get a Social Security number.
There is no myth Julie, the illegal aliens are here illegally and milking the system for all its worth.
If you want to pay the illegal aliens benefits, do it on your dime, not mine.
no, not all illegals are Latino nor are all Latinos legal, but a VAST MAJORITY are … which lends credence to the stereotype, like it or not.
plus, those who SUPPORT illegals are traitors regardless of their legal status – they are promoting anarchy.
The $420 billion is not “adjusted for inflation” — it is what the Social Security Administration has in its Suspense Fund — FICA, not regular federal taxes. That is separate from the $48 billion paid into the US treasury, which comes from regular federal taxes.
And the “vast majority” of Hispanics in this country are not here illegally. Many of them are, but not the “vast majority.”
I doubt it is even the “vast majority” of those here illegally are Hispanic, either. From 25% to 45% of those here illegally did not sneak across our southern border. They entered the country legally and did not leave when their visas expired. Most of those people are not Hispanic, but Middle Eastern, African, Asian, and yes, European. The 9-11 terrorists were non-Hispanic “overstays” (entered legally, but overstayed their visas), yet people are more up in arms about the typical Mexican poor who sneaks across the border because he can’t feed his kids in Mexico. What is wrong with that picture?
While some Latino illegal immigrants abuse “the system” they are in the minority — most illegal immigrants are not on welfare at all. And to be fair, people from all ethnic groups abuse the system, even white US citizens.
Oh, the SUSPENSE FUND!
HA HA HA HA HA HA!
There ain’t no money there, sweetheart.
I’d like more information on this “suspense fund”. First I have heard of it. Unless she is talking about the worthless IOU’sthe treasury has issued the SSA.
Julie, Julie, Julie do you love me? Julie, Julie, Julie do you care?
This is NOT about latino’s, mexicans, or espanol. It is about criminals illegally and deceitfully infiltrating our borders.
The law is the law. They are illegal. Even if you could prove they pay taxes, SS, or contribute more to the economy than they take – it makes jack shit difference.
They are CRIMINALS. LAW BREAKERS. THEY ARE ILLEGALLY PRESENT IN MY COUNTRY AND THEY NEED TO BE ROUNDED UP LIKE CATTLE, DRIVEN INTO PEN’S AND EXPORTED.
This is MY country, land that I love. This is MY country, land of my home. I pledge thy my allegiance – America my HOME! Because this is MY COUNTRY LAND THAT I LOVE!!!!
(hat out, bills only please)
Most of those people are not Hispanic, but Middle Eastern, African, Asian, and yes, European. Posted by: Julie | September 01, 2007 at 10:44 PM
“The Pew Hispanic Center state that 57% of illegal aliens are of Mexican origin and about 24% are of non-Mexican Latin American origin.”
A growing issue is gangs which are made of and support illegal aliens such as Mara Salvatrucha. According to a Maldon Institute report, MS 13 “appears to be in control of much of the Mexican border and, in addition to its smuggling and contraband rackets, the gang collects money from illegal immigrants that it helps [move] across the border into the United States.” [28] Its members have committed murder, severed limbs, assaulted, robbed, and raped [29] and are protected by international law with El Salvador. [30].
Issues related to illegal immigration to the United States include research that such immigration has hidden medical consequences, such as the importation of diseases (such as polio, plague, dengue fever, drug-resistant tuberculosis, the chagas disease, and leprosy), which some sources describe as serious. Wikipedia===========================The term illegal alien commonly refers to a foreign national who resides in another country unlawfully, either by entering that country at a place other than a designated port-of-entry or as result of the expiration of a non-immigrant visa. The important distinction is that this person intends to remain in the country indefinitely. A tourist who has the present intent to leave would be included as a legal alien described above. Today the preferred term by the politically correct is illegal immigrant because the word alien has become unpopular.===========================Joseph Antos, American Enterprise Institute, looks inside the numbers, because they are very misleading.
Broken down by legal vs. illegal uninsured who are NOT U.S. CITIZENS IS 45% of the 47 million.Broken down by age, 18 – 24 years old – 29.3% of the 47 million.
25 – 35 years old – 26.9% of the 47 million.
Broken down by salary, $75,000 or more per year – 8.5% of the 47 million.
Did you get that? Almost half of the uninsured in America are ILLEGAL ALIENS. Think what a financial break to our hospitals and doctors it would be, if the illegals were not here. Just a thought.
Also if you do the math 45% (illegal aliens) of 47 million is over 20 million illegal aliens inside the United States. Fact.http://uncooperativeblogger.wordpress.com/
According to figures 81 percent of illegal Aliens are Mexican or Central American.
Did you get that? Almost half of the uninsured in America are ILLEGAL ALIENS. Posted by: Kansas
Wow! So the imagined “healthcare crises” would be only HALF as bad if it were not for the illegal criminals in our midst?
Well Iowa, it is broken down even more of that. I discussed how it is broken down in another thread, too tired to go into tonite.
Anyway, it breaks down that there are about 8 million people who are legitimately without health care. And of course, they could get health care if they choose to, most do not.
There are a huge number of people who simply refuse to see a doctor or have religious reasons not seeing one.
Kansas this is monumental! Why are we NOT seeing this in the press? Why is the press not investigating this?
Instead, they pick some poor family and lable them as “victims” of the oppressive healthcare system and portray America’s healthcare as inefficient.
Why are liberals and social democrats NOT doing the math?
Are they not smart enough?
This information, if brought forward, would end the debate on socialized medicine as we know it.
Ahhhhhhhhhh HAH! I get it now.
Actually both would have remained US citizens by virtue of the fact they were born here. Your citizenship in the USA is not cancelled because you become a citizen of another nation. There are many dual and even triple citizens in the USA.
Posted by: Kev | September 01, 2007 at 06:26 PM
======================
Kev.. please read the situation again… Their parents were in diplomatic service of their respective countries at the time both children were born… And the Namibian had to renounce American citizenship to become a citizen of Namibia at age 18.. At that time, Namibia didnt recogtnize dual citizenship…
I think I have a possible solution to the illegal law breaking crimials living in our midst.
Offer a bounty and send out the bounty hunters. Offer $100 a head. Bring the “Dog” stateside from Hawaii and his entire family. Of course all American’s could become bounty hunters.
This would be cheaper than hiring more border patrol agents, constructing a wall, or offering them forgiveness (citizenship).
We are handing out billions in Afghan and Iraq to informants and as rewards.
Use that money here at home. Publish a national 1-800 number to turn in illegal criminals who are HIDING in America.
Send out the bounty hunters with their far reaching ability to search, hunt, and track-down criminals.
Go to one house, catch a family of 10, and you get $1,000!!
Great deal.
Do you need a license for this and is there a special catching season?
There are requirements to becoming a licensed bounty hunter. Although, if this program works, we could train and license many, many more.
Maybe 100 dollars is not enough? We have plenty to pass out. Maybe it should be 500 a head. Maybe 1000 for pregnant women illegals. Save us big bucks in the long haul.
Ya know, I am troubled by a couple of things that dont seem to be have been brought into the discussion…
1) In order to get a job legally in this country, any applicant except for those in some fields, must file an I-9 form… a DHS document… And it requires two forms of ID… It can be looked up for the forms accepted…
2) Every employee has to fill out a W-4 form… And that form requires a SS Number… Even if it’s a FAKE, you need to have it…
3) IF the SS card provided is a FAKE, and not caught up with, would it not now STILL be a fake when paid into?? And what about if they try to collect on a FAKE SS card??? It wouldnt be in the system…And if it was STOLEN from a deceased person, it should kick out of the system, when accessed??
4) And when an illegal tries to enroll in a university, and they use their SS #, would that not kick out of the system?? Or, what about providing a birth certificate?? How would they get around that one??
Too many questions not even attempted to be answered in all of this…
I am all for education, but I dont see how they can pull it off, even if we do allow in-state tuition….
HELP???
Ummm uhhhh — Hawaii IS stateside, now that it is a State… LOL
Oh, and another thing I dont understand??? Even if the child of an illegal immigrant(alien) DOES meet in-state tuition qualifications defined by the Court, HOW can they fill in the information about “Parental Information” required on MOST College/University applications??
Wouldnt that information be false??? And if you provide false information, you forfeit the application??? At least thats the way it used to be…
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2007/09/tuition-law-cha.html#comment-81341599
Chas, your #3 and #4 are answered in an earlier post:
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2007/09/tuition-law-cha.html#comment-81341599
The government is able to track down those people using fake SSN, but the court has just stopped such an action.
Hawaii IS stateside, now that it is a State… LOL Posted by: Chas.
Chas, ask anyone who has served in the military and been stationed overseas – to include Hawaii, and Hawaii is NOT stateside. When we talk about stateside, we are talking about the CONUS. This isn’t strictly a military term. Hawaii residents talk about going to the “states”, if you had ever been there you might know that simple fact. It’s simliar to military calling the USA, “get back to the world”.
If any man wants to be ignorant, let him be ignorant.
“Parental Information” required on MOST College/University applications?? Chas
Here’s an example of how they fill out their parents information:
Father:
Joesph Mendez2211 W. 11th StreetLawrence, KS zip
Mother
Josephine Mendez2211 W. 11th StreetLawrence, KS zip
Another rocket scientist has now been educated.
Most Hawaiians I know talk about coming to the “mainland” butnot stateside… LOL
Parental information normally requires more than name, address, and zip code… Like financial information… sometimes copies of tax returns… etc.
On September 27, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) announced that the DREAM Act would not be considered as an amendment to H.R. 1585, the Defense Department authorization bill for fiscal year 2008.
The Washington Times reports, however, that Reid will push for passage of the DREAM Act, which would grant amnesty to millions of illegal aliens, by different means (possibly in its stand-alone form [S. 774, sponsored by Assistant Majority Leader Dick Durbin {D-Ill.}]) before the Senate adjourns for the year (i.e., on or about November 16).
Reid’s concession on the DoD authorization bill may doom other immigration-related amendments to the defense bill as well.
Please fax your senators: We have stopped the DREAM Act for now, but there is already a push to pass it as a stand-alone bill.
Senator Sam Brownback contact information- Taken from his web site
Office location Phone # Fax #Washington DC office 1-202-224-6521 1-202-228-1265Overland Park Office 1-913-492-6378 1-913-492-7253Topeka office 1-785-233-2503 1-785-233-2616Garden City office 1-620-231-6040 1-620-231-6347Wichita office 1-316-264-8066 1-316-264-9078
Senator Pat Roberts Contact Information Taken from his web site
Washington DC office 1-202-224-4774 1-202-224-3514
Overland Park Office 1-913-451-9343 1-913-451-9446Topeka office 1-785-295-2745 1-785-235-3665Wichita office 1-316-263-0416 1-316-263-0273Dodge City Office 1-620-227-2244 1-620-227-2264
Representative Todd Tiahrt, Contact information taken from his web site
Wichita OfficeAddress: 155 North Market St.Suite 400Wichita, KS 67202Phone: 316.262.8992Fax: 316.262.5309Washington Office
Address: 2441 Rayburn BuildingWashington, DC 20515Phone: 202.225.6216Fax: 202.225.3489