The DesNews Editorial Board Needs Help
Yesterday the Deseret MORNING News editorial board criticized a legislative proposal to not grant illegal aliens instate tuition. Rather than attacking the merits of the proposal, however, the DesNews editorial board stooped to attacks on Rep. Donnelson, the sponsor. It is the sign of a poor journalist (or anyone for that matter) who cannot make their argument without personal attacks against the opponent. I have written a letter to the editor, but I doubt it will get published. Thus, I am repeating it here.
To the editor:
Once again the Deseret News editorial board has come to defend the right of “undocumented students” (“illegal aliens” for the rest of us) to get instate tuition. Those who disagree with them lack “compassion,” are “wrong-headed” and have “small minds.” (Nice personal attacks to discredit Rep. Donnelson). These students ended up here “through no choice of their own.”
I know numerous students who grew up in Utah but spent their high school years in other states "through no fault of their own." Why should they have to pay out of state tuition while people who are violating our laws get their education subsidized by the tax payers? Why doesn't’t the Deseret News editorial board show compassion for them? How about the numerous other American citizens who are paying out of state tuition to attend Utah colleges and universities? Could it be that their parents are unwilling to work for five dollars per hour and aren’t a readily labor pool for certain unethical businesses?
I am very pro immigrant. My mother is an immigrant, as is my wife. I believe that we should liberalize our immigration policy to let in more people who want to help build the American dream. (I know several people who got masters and PhDs and then had to leave the country because their Visas expired - seems pretty dumb to be exporting highly educated people). However, I also believe that we should respect our country's laws. If you do not like them - get them changed. But in the meantime - obey the law. As soon as we each decide to ignore the laws we do not agree with, we begin our decent from a representative democracy to a form of anarchy.
I agree with you on one point and repectfully disagree with the two others.
1st -- ad hominem attacks (attacks against the person) show a weakness of argument of the attacker. An attack is an attempt to make the victim into less than human and therefore void of respect. If we are to have tolerance, we must be able to agree to disagree.
2nd -- I believe there is a balance to be struck in everything, including our choice of obeying laws. The default position, of course, should go to obeying laws. However, unjust laws should not go unchallenged. I believe, as I think you might, that the civil rights sit-ins were a just and mighty cause to regain the equal footing of our bretheren and sisters. I believe a person in peril of death,severe permanant injury or other emergency should break the speed limit (with care) and head for the nearest care facility. The protection of the minority from the majority must come sometimes from civil disobedience. Just ask the guys from Boston Harbor about Tea.
3rd -- While I disagree with the way the Deseret News may have presented their case, I do not believe that sacrificing education based on birth requirements is a worthy goal.
The purpose of in-state tuition is to provide a return benefit to the taxpayers of the state because of their subsidy to the state through taxes. Out of state taxpayers are given a similar subsidy to higher education institutions of their state.
Illegal immigrants do not fit within either of those groups. We do not know of their background or the reasons for their choice to be here (poverty, health care, child citizenship, or political assylum). I, however, do believe that it can be reasonably assumed that the choice of being in Utah was not made by the 18-year old child who has reached higher-education age.
Practically, these children are here. We can choose to make their stay here as difficult as possible (and hope they return) or give them the tools to rise above their background.
I personally believe that making their life as difficult as possible encourages crime and gang behavior because of the lack of acceptance. There are no ties to the system. The system becomes out to get them. It is the beginnings or continuance of the cycle of poverty. I also believe that we lose a portion of our humanity by treating people as if they do not belong because of attributes they cannot control.
Giving these children the tools to rise above their background invests them in this culture. We gain their allegiance and their friendship. We also move to a positive sum game, where they contribute to our economic bottom line. I believe that in treating the individual, we keep our humanity.
If this generality is too much for you, then maybe a compromise is in order. Perhaps each case should be evaluated on a case by case basis by a University Coordinator that can make an in-state tuition decision based on the life story of the individual.
If they are here, let's make them better
Reply to this
I guess I can't call you a mind numbed socialist or the like or I would be put on the DesNews editorial board.
I agree that there are situations in which disobeying the law becomes a necessity. However, it should be a last resort. How can you have a civilized society if each person simply picks and choses which laws they want to obey. If I decide that red lights cause pollution by making me idle my car too long, should I simply disregard them. I think most people would agree that the answer is no.
As a basis for disobeying the law you raise civil rights and the Boston Tea Party. Ironically, both situations involved people who had attempted repeatedly (for years) to get unjust laws overturned. They were effectively shut out the the political process and had no other mechanism to address their wrongs.
I never suggested that we should go out of our way to make things as hard for illegal aliens. I am concerned, however, that an illegal alien (or "undocumented student") who attends three years in a Utah high school gets in state tuition, while a student who is born and raised in Utah until their sophmore year in high school has to pay out of state tuition despite the fact that their parents paid taxes in Utah for fourteen years or more. Yes, they may be able to attend school in Michigan, or Oregon, but why should they be put at a disadvantage if they want to come home to Utah.
Additionally, a student who is applying for college in Utah and is here illegally does not lose rights because of attributes they cannot control. At 18 years old they are fully capable of returning to their country of origin and applying to enter the United States legally. They have the advantage of a high school education paid for by the tax payers of Utah. That should give them a leg up on the competition.
Ultimately, it comes down to economics. We have a given amount of tax revenue. How are we going to spend it? While it may sound uncompassionate to want to take care of our own, isn't it uncompassionate not to. How many poor citizens could attend college if all of the money that was spent educating people here illegally was given out in need based scholarships? Why are people with gradute degrees forced to leave the country after their Visas expire, while at the same time we are paying to educate people who came here illegally. The now educated foreigner came here legally, paid out of state tuition for years, and now is forced to go back to their country of origin. It seems strange to me that we penalize those who play by the rules and reward those who do not.
I guess it is ok to disregard the laws - as long as we don't like them.
Reply to this
excellent commentary
Reply to this
I greatly appreciated your comment and Ben's comment on this compassionate but unsensitive message from the DesNews editorial board. Although it is often hard to know where to draw a line in the case of illegal immigration, our laws serve as a compass against injustice to us. I am not writing about illegal immigration itself because I don't have enough characters to do so. However, I want to take a stand when I think that some people are discriminating against my children. Ben mentions people who break the laws in cases of emergencies. In these cases, these people using their best judgement make a choice because they understand what is at stake and that time is crucial. This is not the case with illegal immigrants who prepare their children to follow the same path of their disobeying and for most part unwilling parents. This well taught disobediance is what brings those same children to deliquency not the lack of a hire education.
I am not necessarily against allowing these children to attend our universities. However, I think that the reasons given by the DesNews editorial board and Ben are far from being compassionate. How can one call themselves compassionate when they deliberately discriminate against a group of people to which my children belong? If the board really thinks that hire education will open new and positive opportunities to these children then let's not discriminate or be selectively compassionate. Our kids too are in need of more positive opportunities. They would also like to start their lives with less debts. Thus, let's give all of them a chance or none of them. Even better, let all of them, illegal and not illegal deserve it. Let's grant instate tuition to any children who prove they are desirous to learn, they are looking for more opportunities. They are willing to embrace the opportunity offered to them and make us proud of them.
Reply to this