“Texas makes a PROFIT off the illegals that enter college so it is not a taxpayer issue. “
Prove that.
Students Who Qualified For In-State Benefits Paid Approximately $32.7 Million In Tuition and Fees In FY 2010, A Net Gain Of $11.07 Million. According to the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board: “Institutions of higher education report students who completed an affidavit paid approximately $32.7 million in tuition and fees in Fiscal Year 2010.” [Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board, October 2011]
Removing The Tuition Benefit Will Have An Estimated “Net Loss Of Almost $92 Million In Tuition In Fiscal Year 2016 Alone.” According to Texas immigration attorney Susan Nelson: “A law was proposed in the 2011 legislative session that would have required undocumented students to pay non-resident tuition. The Higher Education Coordinating Board estimated that almost 20,000 students would be affected by the change, and calculated that the state’s institutions of higher learning would suffer a net loss of almost $92 million in tuition in fiscal year 2016 alone.” [Texas Immigration Lawyer Blog, 9/25/11]
WSJ: Undocumented Immigrants In Texas “Are More Likely To Bear A Larger Share Of The Tax Burden Than Their Counterparts In Most Other States.” According to the Wall Street Journal:
Immigration status aside, state residents are thought to be deserving of a subsidy because they pay sales taxes, property taxes and other fees to support state institutions that nonstate residents don’t pay. Especially in a state like Texas that has no income tax, illegal aliens are more likely to bear a larger share of the tax burden than their counterparts in most other states. [Wall Street Journal, 9/27/11]
You: “Trying to ‘blame’ the legislature for this bill would mean you think he is a weak Executive. So ... is he an Open Borders & Amnesty supporter, or ... was he just too weak an Executive to stop this Open Borders & Amnesty law ?”
He signed the bill because that is obviously what Texans wanted.
He represents the people of Texas.
Your argument is flawed: Should Obama pass another Stimulus Bill because he feels it is the right thing to do even though the American People do not want it?
A Government Official is suppose to Represent the People and that is what Governor Perry did.
You: was he just too weak an Executive to stop this Open Borders & Amnesty law ?
Your really losing your credibility here. It is not an open border or amnesty law at all. It has to do with education and it has to do with dealing with a consequence of the Federal Government not doing it’s job of securing the border.
You really do have a problem with putting the blame where it belongs and that is OBAMA.
He refuses to secure the border, refuses to deport, refuses to send more Guard and on top of it all Obama and gang are running guns to the drug cartels across the border.
What is so hard to understand about that?
“It is not an open border or amnesty law at all. It has to do with education and it has to do with dealing with a consequence of the Federal Government not doing it’s job of securing the border.”
You really are blind, aren’t you ? ANYTHING that makes life easier for illegals is an incentive to other foreigners to come here illegally.
As far as the money goes, you need to ask yourself WHO profits. Not the taxpayer who is paying the bill and getting nothing back. Police stopping muggers really cuts into the profits of the muggers, doesn’t it ?
You need to go back and reread the articles you quoted and ask yourself how they can be true. Stop taking at face value every lib article you read. If these 12k illegals paid $32M in tuition and fees, then they paid less than $3K each when full tuition averaged across all state schools is $11K. So the state’s taxpayers paid the other $8K average or roughly $100M. Go to any Texas state university website and look at the difference in tuition for instate vs. nonresident, and ask yourself how each student paying less than the full tuition could ever result in MORE tuition being paid. The only way that happens is if they assume there will be fewer students. Obviously, if those spots are taken by citizens rather than illegals, and the citizens pay the same instate tuition, there is no lost revenue. So ... who is writing the articles, and what assumptions are they making to twist the math that way ? The answer is that they are written from the perspective of the school system, not the taxpayer, and that they assume those spots will not be filled with citizens if the illegals don’t take them. There is no other way for the math to work. So, the spots must stay empty, AND the cost of teachers and facilities must stay constant. Obviously, both can’t happen — either you need all those teachers and facilities because citizens filled those student rolls, or you saved the money because you needed fewer teachers and facilities.
OF COURSE a school system will receive less money from the state if there are fewer students, because fewer teachers and facilities must be paid for. “Profits” go down.
OF COURSE the taxpayer will PAY LESS IN TAXES if there are fewer students chewing up tax dollars. “Tax Bills” go down.
That’s what conservatives should want — the taxpayer paying the least amount possible while still serving its citizens.
Increasing the number of students the taxpayer must pay for is what the teachers and school administrators want, because that means more jobs and money for them.