« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

Mitt Romney’s Sanctuary Cities and Sanctuary Mansion

By: Erick Erickson (Diary)  |  September 28th, 2011 at 03:27 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

Back in 1992, Massachusetts Senator Paul Tsongas, running for the Democratic presidential nomination, labeled Bill Clinton a “pander bear.”

We’ve come full circle I’m afraid and the issue goes directly to why so many conservatives who are willing to settle for Mitt Romney really do not want to settle more Mitt Romney.

Romney is bringing up Sanctuary Cities again. He is using it as an issue against Rick Perry with a new Pew report out that Texas has the highest number of illegal immigrants next to California.

“As you know, I opposed sanctuary cities as the governor of my state,” Romney said. “And the idea that a city would determine that it’s not going to follow the U.S. law is unacceptable and immigration law is federal law.

“Immigration laws are the responsibility of the federal government. The fact that you’re seeing states come up with various programs to try and secure their border is simply an indication that the federal government has failed in doing its job. And I need some lawyers to tell me how to go about doing it, but I would end sanctuary cities, if it’s legally possible.”

First, I expect we’ll start hearing about Mitt Romney’s sanctuary mansion again. But beyond that, the record suggests that, like going after Texas’s job creation record compared to his own in Massachusetts, Romney will have to be careful.

As Factcheck noted way back in November of 2007,

Romney might well get tough on sanctuary cities in the future, but he didn’t when he was governor. During his tenure, at least four Massachusetts cities enacted or renewed legislation declaring themselves sanctuaries for illegal immigrants. Brookline and Cambridge reaffirmed their longtime status as sanctuary cities in so many words. Somerville and Orleans didn’t officially deem themselves ‘sanctuaries,’ but Somerville affirmed its ‘long-standing policies in support of all immigrants,’ while Orleans forbade city officials from turning in illegal immigrants without probable cause. We asked Romney’s campaign if he had acted against these cities, but they didn’t provide us with any examples. As far as we were able to determine in our own research, Romney made no attempts to penalize, censure, or cut funding to them.

But we don’t have to rely on a left-wing site portraying itself as the arbiter of truth.

Go back to August 22, 2007, and the Associated Press covered the Giuliani v. Romney fight.

Romney has pledged to cut federal funds from cities that adopt what he calls sanctuary policies and ignore federal immigration laws. But as governor, Romney didn’t cut funding for four cities called sanctuary cities in Massachusetts.

The ads also say that as governor Romney ordered state police to enforce existing immigration laws. While true, Romney signed the law ordering state police to enforce the laws during his final weeks in office. Romney’s successor narrowed it to Department of Corrections officers. State police never began training.

Tags: , , ,
Get Alerts

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • chihank

    For the past two debates, the media and the other candidates were piling on Perry for all sorts of things. Yet Romney gets a free pass. I wonder if Santorum and Bachmann are being used by the GOP establishment to damage Perry for Romney.

    Also, Perry signing the Dream Act in Texas was on the recommendation by George W Bush on the hopes of the GOP being able to attract Latinos.

  • dukefergus

    The only ideology that Mitt Romney is tethered to is a full and complete devotion to his own advancement. Such is evidenced in his “I’m a Liberal” (against Kennedy), “I’m a conservative” (against McCain) and now “I’m a moderate” (Against Perry) chameleon act. The dramatic shifting of his positions with such ease makes what would otherwise be breathtaking hypocrisy in his current campaign actually seem natural and apparently acceptable to many Republicans, including many conservatives. Worse yet, all have allowed Romney to lead them down the path of focusing on gotcha lines and moments and distracting from any substantial discussion on the future and certainly away from any discussion of Romney’s horrendous track record on everything from taxes to of course Ronmeycare. Romney’s daily talking points are the equivalent of National Enquirer headlines. Mock outrage at half truths or even untruths. While one can hardly blame Romney for going with what works, everyone else should be ashamed for making it a profitable strategy for him.

  • minister_of_war

    What do you expect that each person who hires a landscaper checks all of its employees through E-Verify first?

    Romney gave the landscaping company a 2nd chance to make sure he did things correctly by only hiring legal workers. Then when it was found out that the landscaping company was still using illegal labor, Romney fired them.

    What would you have preferred that Romney did instead – sent those illegal laborers to college so they could get discounted in-state tuition in Texas?

  • freentn

    !

  • rechts

    In regards to immigration, I have problems with what both of them have said and done in the past. The more important concern however, is what each would do in the future. They need to make it clear to the base how exactly they would tackle immigration and border security as POTUS.

  • Scope

    and has been trying to get out in front of issues where he has a less than stellar record, that can be used against him. If he uses those weaknesses against Perry first, and actually distorts the issues to make Perry’s actions look much worse than they are, then it puts Perry on defense. The media including TV and print have just as much access to the past Romney records while he was Gov., but has been playing selective amnesia when it comes to the only possible candidate that can beat Obama, or so they say. Slowly there have been more and more coming on board and have been posting articles about the media complicity for Romney, just as they were amnesiac and complicit in pushing Obama across the finish line in 08. Anyone who has the first little bit of sense should be able to see right through the game, and realize that there is a reason why the very same people who gave us Obama are willing to give us Romney this time around. Much has to do with the similarities of Obamacare and Romneycare, and Romney and the liberals are still determined to push Cap and Trade, and green projects. Romney just said not that long ago that he believes Global Warming is man made. Romney=Obama, and there is nothing lite about Romney’s support of the liberals major agendas.

  • tyman

    Huh, if you put them together, what do you get? BS.

    The Texas Dream Act was also signed before 9/11 stymied any hopes of any immigration legislation.

  • freentn

    to landscape the lawn at his Mansion in Massachusetts. He knew they were illegal and continued to allow them to work for him. Those are the FACTS you can’t spin romney out of this.

    I wish that one or more of the candidates would start exposing romney’s dishonesty.

  • Aaron Gardner

    Read it here:

    In the telephone town hall, which was first reported by CNN, Perry emphasized he would support a fence along some parts of the U.S. border with Mexico. Some party activists are frustrated that Perry does not support a border-wide fence.

    He defended his decision to allow some illegal immigrants to pay reduced, in-state tuition to Texas universities but said it was ?a Texas solution for a Texas problem? and he would not impose such a policy nationally.

    The practicability of a fence that spans the entire border just isn’t there. Not to mention the fact that we would have years worth of eminent domain suits to deal with.

  • florida772

    nice try

  • Repair_Man_Jack

    He makes errors. People try to jump on them. The people attempting to jump on them overreact and suffer from their own terminal dumb.

    It would be ironic if Perry were actually aware that this would happen and made these “errors” as a way of sucking Bachmann, Romney, et al. in and then letting them self-destruct.

    This will be brought out elsewhere, and by Gov. Perry in the next debate, if Romney keeps using immigration as a hammer.

  • Kyle-MI

    The linked-to article says that he checked the immigration status of the company owner who was clear. Speaking Spanish is not proof that someone is illegal although with some it might raise suspicions. You offer absolutely no FACTS to show that Romney knew they were illegal. You have given nothing to dispute MoW’s statements.

  • minister_of_war

    So, what’s your proof that he “knew” they were illegal? Or are you just saying that because the landscaping firm’s workers had a darker skin color so Romney must have known that they were illegal aliens?

  • florajo

    Romney sort of looks and behaves like a conservative but who really knows what’s going on? Sometimes I think he exists just to damage the true conservatives. He just wants to wear us all down into submission, until we grow weary and cave in: “Yeah Mitt, whatever, go ahead and run, nobody cares anymore.”

  • TopGun

    is the feeling you will get if you vote for Mitt “FlipFlopper” Romney after he shows himself as dangerous to the sovereignty of the USA as the present Domestic Enemy occupying the White House.

  • rechts

    but if he wants to alleviate the fears of the base he needs to say, ‘I absolutely will secure the border. I will oppose amnesty. I will go after employers that hire illegals, I will deport and ban immigrants convicted of violent criminal offenses’ etc.

    Just saying he wouldn’t support a national DREAM Act is not enough.

  • izoneguy

    Perry needs to ask Romney –
    How much will an 1800 mile fence cost?
    Who will pay for this 1800 mile fence?
    How long will it take to build a fence?
    How will you handle private property owners?
    How will you secure the border during the 50 years
    it will take to build a 3 TRILLION dollar fence?

  • freentn

    Nominating romney would be a disaster for the Republican Party.

    romney electable? If romney is nominated the Press will start ripping him apart the day after he gives his acceptance speech. And it won’t be like McCain, conservatives will not defend him. Conservatives will run away from romney once he is exposed as a fraud.

    There is no doubt that there will be a 3rd Party Challenge to romney and if predictions are correct that Hillary not BO will be the democRat nominee, she will win because many independents will not see any difference between hillary and romney.

  • tailfins1959

    However, it does work in Perry’s favor that he was wounded early, which gives him time to heal. On the tuition uproar he should point out that the tuition break requires applying for citizenship and wouldn’t be necessary if citizenship applications were processed in a reasonable amount of time.

  • tyman

    !

  • onemovoter

    How do you build a fence along the Rio Grande when it’s like the Grand Canyon?

    How will you compensate the cattle ranchers that will no longer have water access for their cattle to drink?

    How will it affect the wildlife that migrates through there?
    How will you deal with the environmentalists that will sue you to eternity over it.
    How will you deal with the red tape from all of the different departments that will have a say in such a fence?

    I know some other will roll their eyes at the environmental stuff but you have to face reality, as some of us out here do every day with those idiots from the government.

  • freentn

    like BO’s campaign in 2008. BO was thoroughly dishonest and enough rinos and moderate independents fell for his lies to get him elected.

    Conservatives Republicans are not as dumb as rinos and not as uninformed and gullible as some independents.

  • tyman

    He opens the door, allows them to get themselves into something, and then he just slams the door on them.

    I’ve heard that Perry is an incredible campaigner, and that he is relentless against opponents.

    Some say he needs to lighten up on Romney, but I think that is the wrong tactic. Romney gives Perry no quarter, and Perry can’t just take the lies and misstatements that Romney is telling about Perry.

    If Romney gets the nom, and wins the WH, and he doesn’t follow through or pulls a McCain, that will set Republicans back to the stone age. That’s one reason I say it’s a good thing that McCain lost. No way 2010 happened if McCain had won.

  • tyman

    about Perry trapping his opponents

  • Aaron Gardner

    In the first debate he had this to say:

    Q: What would make the border secure?

    PERRY: Well, the first thing you need to do is have boots on the ground. We’ve had a request in to this administration since 2009 for 1,000 border patrol agents or National Guard troops, and working towards 3,000 border patrol. That’s just on the Texas border. There’s another 50% more for the entire Mexican border. So you can secure the border, but it requires a commitment of the federal government of putting those boots on the ground, the aviation assets in the air. We think predator drones could be flown, that real-time information coming down to the local and the state and the federal law enforcement. And you can secure the border. And at that particular point in time, then you can have an intellectually appropriate discussion about immigration reform. For the President to go to El Paso, Texas, and say that the border is safer than it’s ever been, either he has some of the poorest intel in history, or he was an abject liar. It is not safe on that border.

    Then in the next debate he said this:

    There’s not anybody on this stage that’s had to deal with the issue of border security more than I have, with 1,200 miles of border with Mexico. And our federal government has been an abject failure at securing our border. We’ve had to spend some $400 million of Texas taxpayer dollars to send Texas Ranger recon teams down there. But the idea that you’re going to build a wall from Brownsville to El Paso and go left for another 800 miles to Tijuana is just not reality. What you have to have is boots on the ground. You’ve got to have 450 Border Patrol agents trained up, 1,500 National Guard troops. You’ve got to have the aviation assets in the air putting real-time information down to the law enforcement. We understand and know how to secure that border, but we can’t do it alone. And the federal government has to step up and do what their constitutional duty is, and that is to secure the border with Mexico.

    I am really at a loss as to what is so ambiguous about this answer.

    As Governor of Texas Perry also adopted the following policy of the NGA:

    The Governors urge Congress to consider the following principles regarding immigration policies.
    The decision to admit immigrants is a federal one that carries with it a firm federal commitment to shape immigration policy within the parameters of available resources we as a nation are determined to provide.
    The fiscal impact of immigration decisions must be addressed by the federal government. The states, charged with implementing federal policy, have shared and are sharing in the costs; however, there should be no further shift of costs to the states.
    A basic responsibility of the federal government is to collect and disseminate timely and reliable statistical information on immigration and its consequences for the United States.
    Federal immigration policies should ensure that new immigrants do not become a public charge to federal, state, or local governments.
    The federal government must provide adequate information to and consult with states on issues concerning immigration decisions that affect the states.
    States should not have to incur significant costs in implementing federal laws regarding immigration status as a condition of benefits.

    The Governors urge the following regarding Legalization and Naturalization:
    States require maximum flexibility in determining and allocating resources to meet the needs of newly legalized aliens.
    The Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) must be diligent in its efforts to ensure that felons are not naturalized and being given the benefits of citizenship rather than being deported.
    The naturalization process should be streamlined to be more efficient and accessible to eligible applicants wishing to become citizens, with all the rights and responsibilities thereof.
    The INS must take aggressive action to eliminate the backlog of naturalization applications, which is now approximately 800,000 nationwide.

    All of this information is readily available for anyone willing to look.

  • freentn

    to check the backgrounds of people working for him. He didn’t check the status of the illegals working for him because he did not want to verify. The only reason he did not want to verify is because he knew they were illegals.

    Similarly, as Gov of Massachusetts romney did not do anything to stop Santuary Cities for illegals because he obviously wanted Massachusetts to have Santuary Cities for illegals.

  • freentn

    Morris is say that he thinks BO will drop out of the 2012 race.

  • Scope
  • freentn

    now saying BO will drop out.

  • tailfins1959

    What will a fence do when you call 911 during a home invasion or kidnapping? Boots on the ground can respond to violence perpetrated by criminals after they cross the border.

  • freentn

    Perry does indeed have a strong record against illegal immigration. romney’s attacks are thoroughly dishonest. He lied repeatedly on Hannity today about Perry’s record.

  • Doc Holliday

    pretty much all politicians are full of it on this issue. No one is going to “secure the border”; how long have we been talking about this? Aaron’s Reagan clip showed Reagan saying the border has been out of control for decades, and Reagan said that in 1984.

    People will use the issue for political reasons, they will talk about it during election season, but nothing will actually get done.

    The reason GWB and his ilk were soft on illegal immigration, is they already knew the issue was long ago decided. The GWB types believe in the old line, “if you can’t beat them, join them”. That is why so many Republicans have tried and tried to get minorities to our side. The reality is you can’t out liberal a liberal. The left and MSM are already going all race all the time.

    While we might be able to attract Hispanic voters at the margins, there will likely never be a major shift in political affiliation. People are either politically conservative or they are not. If you have to pander to them, you have already lost the game. Liberals pander to grievance groups, that is their entire political philosophy.

    I do believe people like Cain on this issue. We have to have borders and they have to be protected, if not, then we are not a real nation. But establishment types will not do a thing, they probably couldn’t do a thing about it if they wanted to.

  • wonkish1

    Nostradamus’s deaf, dumb, and blind nephew.

  • freentn

    .

  • Darin_H

    An early loss is better than a late loss.

  • Darin_H

    Maybe Morris can re-issue his book…

  • freentn

    for Perry on Newsmax. He clearly explains his positions when he has sufficient time to do so.

    The debates favor dishonest candidates like romney who tell lies in catchy sound bites.

  • acat

    Caesar Chavez took a more proactive (some may say violent) approach when he was running the United Farm Workers.

    This is a problem well over a hundred years in the making.

    My opinion is that we need a defense-in-depth strategy, something like E-verify only with a way for the States to get some green*, followed by boots on the border to interdict gang and trafficing of drugs and people.

    After that, we can and should look at what mix of amnesty and deportation is the right mix.

    Mew

  • Scope

    Condi isn’t the only former Bushie appointee, or family member for that matter, that have come out in support of far less than conservative, or even traditional Republican positions. Bush in many many ways destroyed what the meaning of conservatism has always been thought to be. Bush is without doubt one of the biggest bulldozers of conservatism, with his “compassionate conservatism” meaning redistribution of wealth with his Medicare Part D, No child left behind, and promotion of the McCain/Kennedy amnesty plan. Since leaving office some of his closest family members, and some in his administration have gone all in on the destruction of anything traditional conservatives held dear, and couldn’t wait to get out there and promote their compassion.

  • freentn

    Perry can recover but he has got to do better in the debates. I appreciate the Articles and Video that Aaron and scope supplied. The more people see the thoughtful detailed statements by Perry compared to the romney’s debate soundbite silliness, Perry will get his momentum back.He has over 3 months to recover.

    Being out of the frontrunner spot for a while may help Perry if others start toattack romney’s Flip-Flops and Lies which is an incredibly target rich environment

    Perry is not the best debater but he is honest and when he is wrong he admits it.Perry’s honesty is refreshing compared to romney’s dishonesty.

  • Darin_H

    Please read the above post as much sarcasm as possible. Dick Morris is only good at one thing – writing books that are wrong on every level.

  • freentn

    about democrats who want BO to drop out and want to see hillary and other and other democRats to run against BO?

  • Doc Holliday

    but it was exciting back then. Bandits from both sides stealing cattle, Black Jack Pershing, Rangers. Now it is only sad, craven, and Godless.

  • Doc Holliday

    just tell them the the quicker they get in line, the quicker they get sorted out. I think they should know where the line is.

  • freentn

    as BO but I agree Republicans who vote for romney will have tremendous buyers remorse if he gets the nomination because the media and democRats will surely expose all of romney’s Flip-Flops. It will make the attacks on Perry look like child’s play because romney will not have Truth on his side as Perry does.

  • minister_of_war

    Romney had no authorization to check the individual employment status of each worker of the landscaping company. That’s not even legal. That’s why employers are expected to do that kind of thing. Do you get fined for ordering a burger from a person who you think might be in the country illegally or would that fine go to the employer?

    What you’re asking Romney to do is not hire people who are darker skinned & have accents or to just assume that people with accents or limited English are illegal aliens.

  • gekster

    He was Hinz Ruled yesterday for the crap he was posting.

    Reply if you want, it would be up to you.

  • olsmithie

    today, if it is a flipflop from what they said 5 or 10 years ago?
    I don’t care what any of them are saying today, their true beliefs are more likely what they were saying in prior years.
    The NY Times picked Johnny Mack for us. Do we let the liberal press pick Mitt for us? Enough with the fake conservatives.
    There are enough real conservatives running that we could pick one, without falling for the flipfloppers. None of them are perfect, but look what the candidate is running against.
    I could pull a drunk from under a nearby bridge more qualified to run the country than Komrade Obama.
    Off the soapbox…
    Regards

  • freentn

    It is NOT about race. I have a HIGH REGARD for Hispanic Citizens. IMHO Gov Susana Martinez would be a GREAT VP pick.

    You can’t pull those racist Alinsky smears on me.

    No my posts have NOTHING to do with race my posts are about romney hiring ILLEGAL ALIENS to do his yard work at his Mansion is Massachusetts.

  • runner12

    NT

  • runner12

    be careful what you go after others for. You have a long record yourself that has some real doozies in it. Does RomneyCare ring a bell?

    Why not train your focus on Obama and quit bashing our candidates. Then you can try and sell yourself as the best alternative.

    Although this conservative voter is not buying what you are selling, I would hold my nose and vote for you if you were the nominee.

    But I will do just about everything to ensure that noseplugs will not be needed when I pull the lever in 2012. Translation: next to Huntsman you would be my last choice for the nominee.

  • Thomas_Alan

    Has nothing worth responding to.

    I’m sorry, it’s about the weakest argument you can make. Like Romney was supposed to run around asking other people’s employees for their green cards.

    Romney is not a racist so he wouldn’t do something so foul. You want me to read your stuff, don’t come in with something so insulting to my intelligence.

  • Thomas_Alan

    Romney didn’t hire any illegal aliens whatever. He paid a company for a service. No one involved was in Romney’s employ.

    Only people in the most remote parts of the country haven’t dealt with companies that employ illegals.

  • 1stRichard

    In fact, it continued to get worse

    http://www.redstate.com/1strichard/2011/02/27/the-american-dream/

    If Romney did almost nothing to fix this problem, he should not be trusted to fix a national problem.

  • freentn

    The illegals were most definitely working for romney at his Mansion. romney will not be able to spin his way out of this.

  • westcoastpatriette

    I just watched a seventeen minute interview of Perry at Townhall and came away feeling more confident in him than I have ever been.

    The debates are so poorly done they make everyone look shallow and petty.

    Anyway, I feel much better now and am convinced that Perry is the strongest candidate–and he sincerely apologized for his poor choice of words at the last debate. While he didn’t go into too much detail re: actions he will take as prez to deal with the ill. imm. problem, he made clear that he has a good command of the overall issue, and for the first time he made clear he knows its a huge problem and he does not believe in a massive amnesty. It was what I needed to hear to reassure me that he was not overly sympathetic to the point that he would betray Americans by granting amnesty to millions here now.

    Just for the record, I also learned a new stat that should change the dynamics of the debate over what to do about the millions who are here now and that is that only fifty percent of them came here by sneaking across the border. The other half have all over-stayed their visas. So, that is interesting and, again, is a reflection of how poorly managed the immigration bureaucracy is. (Surprise, surprise.)

    I think Perry will get a handle on the intense reaction people are having about the Texas Dream Act and realize that many things have changed since 2001 when the law was enacted. The problem has worsened for one, and peoples’ anger about the government’s failure to act could not be more intense. Couple that with Obama actively sabotaging states that are trying to deal with the problem and the issue is just explosive on many levels.

    Going forward, I have grappled with my conscience about the Texas Act as it is very unsettling in so many ways but it is also hard to figure out what would be a fair way to deal with so many of the children who have grown up here. I thought of this: I think the best way forward would be to allow the private sector to develop programs where sponsors would adopt worthy illegals who want to go to college here and become citizens. That way, the costs would not be borne by taxpayers and people who feel so strongly that we should not blame kids for their parents actions forever would feel we are showing reasonable compassion on the issue. The sponsors would bear the responsibility to make sure the adopted illegal complied with all aspects of the program–maybe it could even include a return to their motherland for a period of time as some sort of internship. Anyway, I think that is the compassionate way to go forward without making taxpayers foot the bill.

  • freentn

    bachmann’s fence BS is ridiculous.

  • freentn

    romney has Flip-Flopped too many times to be trusted.

  • Thomas_Alan

    It’s what happened. What you and Eric are doing is spin.

  • freentn

    ad showing how romney wrecked the economy in Massachusetts with tax increases and romneyCare.

  • acat

    When times are good, the border isn’t a big deal, but when times are bad it’s more of a sore point and campaign issue. I don’t have stats to prove this, it’s just an impression, so .. I could be wrong.

    I would point out, by the way, that the 9/11 hijackers were here on visas, although I don’t recall whether they overstayed. How long have Obama’s relatives in Boston been here, again?

    (cheshire grin)

  • freentn

    interview? I am glad Perry is pro-actively giving interviews to the the Truth out about his positions.

    He should release to the Legislative record showing the Financial Analysis of the In-State Tuition bill.

  • westcoastpatriette

    And I think the hijackers did overstay their visas.

    Anyway, I feel better now.

    What do you think about the private sponsorship of illegals? Do you think something like that could work?

  • westcoastpatriette

    I think I am confusing Newsmax with Townhall or are they one and the same? It was an excellent interview and Perry was so confident and his many years of experience are desperately needed now. He just shone through as competent and fully capable of cleaning up after the O.

  • westcoastpatriette

    whoa! This comment was supposed to be a reply to freentn. Don’t know what happened.

  • freentn

    about romney’s troublesome history of supporting illegals.

    Again the Alinsky tactics do not work on me and I doubt that they will work on Erick either. I am simply appalled by romney’s deceitful dishonest smears of Perry on immigration when he is a MUCH WORSE OFFENDER regarding illegals!

    I’m NOT spinning anything. This is just another example of romney’s hypocrisy but frankly I don’t need another reason to be disgusted with romney, ObamneyCare is more than enough reason for me to oppose him.

  • freentn

    as of now I still think Perry is the best man for the job.

    I wouldn’t pick him for debate team captain. LOL! but he has a 10 year record of success in Texas as the Chief Executive. No one else even comes close to matching Perry’s experience and success.

  • westcoastpatriette

    froth at the mouth trying to create a “gotcha” moment that it just denigrates the whole process, not to mention wasting everyone’s time. It’s frustrating to say the least.

  • onemovoter

    Which is how people coming here legally are supposed to do under the immigration laws we have currently at the federal level.

    The thing I’m looking at here is that college still costs money to go to. These illegals are willing to pay to go through college and become a productive person.

    Now the question is, where are these students getting the money to pay for college? My guess is the parents are working somewhere, providing a home and support for their children. I don’t know if this is always true but it’s probably a good guess. For those working hard, wanting to do good, are people I don’t have a problem with.

    The ones I have a problem with are ones just living off the welfare or are criminals. Even in Missouri, we have had problems with illegals who were criminal. My long time friend was raped by one and later had her car totaled by an illegal with no insurance. What really sucked was the cop couldn’t keep the illegal for long in jail. Once they were convicted, they were handed over to ICE.

    As to the “taxpayer subsidy” that you mentioned. When you have sales taxes and user fees along with property taxes, it doesn’t matter if you are legal or illegal, you pay those taxes. Perry should be saying, it is illegal to tax illegals without representation. I think someone here at RS posted that there was a court case that said if someone pays taxes, you can’t deny them access to the services those funds go to.

    To me once people learn about the situation down on the border states, and the problems and handcuffs the federal government has put on them, the better people will understand. I do agree though that Perry has to do better at explaining policies before others twist them to their benefit.

  • westcoastpatriette

    but there is room for legitimate argument–on moral grounds if nothing else–for not allowing them access to in-state tuition just because they are here illegally. That is why I thought the better way to go would be to allow sponsors to assist them through the process and that may or may not include financial help but I still think it is wrong to give them in-state breaks. With a sponsor and without the tuition break, I think Americans could accept letting them stay as they would not feel it was completely unfair to all the people who have played by the rules.

  • Thomas_Alan

    Do you even know what that means?

    Erick knows that Romney did nothing wrong by hiring a company who did something wrong. Heck, he knows that Romney was a rather strong opponent of illegal immigration, at least in his last couple of years in office.

    I’m not sure how you can say Romney is a much worse offender than Perry on immigration when the records pretty much speak for themselves. Romney vetoed in-state tuition for illegals, while Perry signed it and accused anyone who disagreed with him of not having a heart.

    There’s no “troublesome history” of supporting illegals. It just doesn’t exist. The only thing that anyone has ever come up with is an out of context quote.

    Perry, on the other hand, seemed like an unapologetic supporter of open borders for years, and has just now only begun to supporter even mild enforcement efforts.

  • lineholder

    I don’t envy the governor’s of those states at all. The federal government has failed to do it’s job, putting the welfare of citizens in those states at potential risk, and the governor’s are the ones who have to deal with that reality day in and day out. There truly is a fine line on this type of situation that isn’t as easily defined as we might like to think it is.

    On one hand, I agree with what you’ve said about them coming productive participants in our nation’s economy rather than dependent on welfare. And since the federal government is failing on its responsibilities, then this would seem to be a logical approach to take.

    On the other hand, there’s the possibility that it encourages acceptance of illegal behavior. The law is the law. This is a nation governed by the rule of law, not the rule of man. Being here illegally is against the law.

    I guess I’m just wondering how these kinds of situations influence the mentality and behavior of those who do come here illegally and are provided with these kinds of opportunities. Do they accept the rule of law? Or is it something they think they can bypass and ignore? That plays a part in what they contribute to our society in the long run, doesn’t it?

  • onemovoter

    In several different states, and found that foreign students can actually qualify for in state rates if they follow domicile rules for that particular state. Each state has it’s own rules on that.

    The illegals in Texas end up getting visas so they are able to stay in the US. They are put at the back of the line for citizenship. They end up doing what is legal for everyone else. To take away the in state rates for initially being illegal, but doing what it takes to become legal in order to stay and pay, would invite a huge lawsuit.

    In order to take away the tuition break, you’ll have to change federal law and 3 decades of precedence of lawsuits. The sponsor part is legal and is actually required by federal law. That is to keep them off welfare.

    See that’s the whole problem with this issue. The federal government has overstepped it’s authority and dictated what should be state powers, such as tuition rates. It’s why I’m trying to have people learn what powers federal and state have on immigration and education.

  • westcoastpatriette

    needs to be challenged and overruled as it was a faulty decision made by activist judges. Talk about an unfunded mandate. I read the ruling on that case and the judges who dissented were appalled that the ruling would force Americans to subsidize illegals. It is right up there with Roe v Wade in terms of unconstitutional and that one ruling has led to the out of control situation that we have now. I do not think that decision would be upheld by our current Supreme Court.

  • onemovoter

    Imagine you are 2 or 3 years old and don’t remember moving from Mexico to the US. From that point on, your parents set up what seems to be a normal family situation, with your parents working and providing a home.

    You end up going through your entire life like everyone else around you as a normal kid in the US. You are in your final year of high school and are looking towards going to college. However your federal application comes back saying the SS you put down belonged to some dead person and that you are an illegal.

    So then what happens in this situation? This is what I’ve been reading on other boards while researching this topic. Nearly most of the instances like this is what is happening in Texas and other states. In state tuition breaks for college is not something they say they are looking for when illegals come to the US.

    I don’t get your question of them, asking if they accept the rule of law? The kid is willing to follow every law put in front of them in order to pay for college. How could anyone ask that if you aren’t asking that of yourself? Seriously?

    Point the blame where it belongs, the liberals who have screwed up the education and immigration laws.

  • onemovoter

    case. From that point on it’s been all downhill. That court case also led to forcing states to provide welfare too. It was the big reason why Prop 187 was shot down in California.

    Congress and the President could put forth a new law over writing the public schooling law that led to the 1982 case. From there it would free up the states from federal mandates.

  • lineholder

    vs. rule of man. This isn’t about blaming anyone. It’s a societal issue re: respect for the law.

    The people of Texas support this decision, and that’s fine. That’s their choice and they have that prerogative. But it bothers me in the context that it does send very plain messages about acceptance of illegal behaviors.

    Now, even though that person might be a resident of Texas now and granduate from a school in Texas, that’s doesn’t necessarily mean that they will stay in the state of Texas. They could move anywhere in this country.

    If they decided to move to NC where I live, I’d like to know that they have established enough respect for the law to abide by it, because if they haven’t, then I’m looking at the possibility of having a neighbor that sees illegal behavior as being acceptable.

    It’s not entirely a static issue. It’s complex, yes, and I didn’t fault Perry for the decision that was made. The question that I’ve asked about the behavioral patterns that end up being established is valid.

  • rightwingmom52

    to this info or process? I’ve asked several times how the process works after the kids make application to become a legal citizen and gotten no real answers. I’m interested in reading more on the subject but hadn’t been able to find anything.

  • center77

    now if Romney becomes our president, it is going to be conservatives who are mad for 4 years. Romney is quoting British economist John Maynard Keynes on the campaign trail, sure he though it was Churchill, but still. The signs are there. The man still has a flip flop problem. His book as 2 passages where he changed it to fit what he thought people wanted to here. I lost all respect for Cain because he is selling himself to the establishment. This makes me sick, and I am not trying to be over histrionic. I am just stating facts, and how they make me feel. Cain decided it would be best to ally with Romney. Romney’s only chance to win is if conservatives slip their vote between ten people, nine people, or even five people. Perry has stood firm, we know he stands with us on most everything. Even where he does not stand with conservatives, most can understand he is a boarder governor, and needed to make this pragmatic position.

    Latino’s want to leave Obama, but they will not go to a party who slams them left and right. This needs to be stated. Romney has a huge Mormon problem. I asked people at my church if they would ever vote for Romney or huntsman, out of the 20 I asked, 19 said they would probably stay home, and some even said they vote for Obama. This matters because Romney has hurt himself in two major voting blocks. Remember, the evangelical vote and the Latino vote both can swing elections, combined will hurt Romney. Now add this with the fact Obama will bring up his job crushing stint at Bain capital, and his constant flip flop on education, abortion, stimulus, and just about everything else. How can anybody think Romney can win.

  • center77

    but Romney has some problems that make him unelectable. First and foremost, like John kerry, he will be painted as untrustworthy. Second, he has a Mormon problem that nobody wants to talk about. His stint at Bain capital has been a job crusher. He will never get Latino votes. He has changed his book to meet the political winds. He has been quoting Keynes on the campaign trail (I know, he did not know, but he did it)