cshs81 Posted November 30, 2007 Posted November 30, 2007 In the debate the other night, a question was asked or somehow the subject came up regarding children of illegal immigrants being eligible for college scholarships. Maybe it was Romney who said he was against it with the reasoning that the parents committed an illegal act and , therefore, the children of those parents should not benefit. Ol' Huck disagreed saying that this country should NEVER be about punishing children. Thoughts? If you're with Mitt Romney on this issue, please provide some thoughts as to why. Its an interesting debate.
HHSDad Posted November 30, 2007 Posted November 30, 2007 It's not about punishing the children, its about not rewarding criminal behavior. There is also a limited amount of college scholarships available. That means if an illegal is getting it, then a citizen is having to pay for his own college. Let me qualify that I don't care where private scholarships go to.
Hearsay Posted November 30, 2007 Posted November 30, 2007 If they were born in this country and are legal U.S. citizens, Romney is wrong. If they were brought to this country and are illegal themselves, I think it is a grey area. Presumably, a state allowed the enrollment of the illegal child at a public school in that state. Therefore, that state already has provided them public benefits, and it would be disingenuous for that same state to then say that they could not be entitled to public scholarship money or even state-based merit aid. Certainly, no private school is ever required to provide scholarship money to anyone whether illegal or not. I would agree with Romney about giving an illegal child any federal dollars. This has nothing to do with punishing children for their parents crimes. We punish children for their parents crimes all the time.
ladiesbballcoach Posted November 30, 2007 Posted November 30, 2007 It's not about punishing the children, its about not rewarding criminal behavior. There is also a limited amount of college scholarships available. That means if an illegal is getting it, then a citizen is having to pay for his own college. Let me qualify that I don't care where private scholarships go to. NOT TRUE on the program that they were attacking Huckabee for. The program was a merit-based scholarship. Kids had to meet certain grade levels, basically straight A's to EARN the scholarship. ANY STUDENT who EARNED those grades received the scholarship. No kids were excluded because of the illegal AND the kid had to have been enrolled in the school system for his entire school career. He couldn't move in the last year and get it. So, NO CITIZEN lost anything. If a kid is a law-abiding, straight A student, don't we want those type of people as citizens of this country?
cshs81 Posted November 30, 2007 Author Posted November 30, 2007 I would agree with Romney about giving an illegal child any federal dollars. Are you saying that public schools should not allow these kids to enroll?
cshs81 Posted November 30, 2007 Author Posted November 30, 2007 NOT TRUE on the program that they were attacking Huckabee for. The program was a merit-based scholarship. Kids had to meet certain grade levels, basically straight A's to EARN the scholarship. ANY STUDENT who EARNED those grades received the scholarship. No kids were excluded because of the illegal AND the kid had to have been enrolled in the school system for his entire school career. He couldn't move in the last year and get it. So, NO CITIZEN lost anything. If a kid is a law-abiding, straight A student, don't we want those type of people as citizens of this country? I would think that your statement that "no citizen lost anything" might be a little misleading. I assume that these merit-based scholarships are funded with tax dollars, correct?
acemona Posted November 30, 2007 Posted November 30, 2007 NOT TRUE on the program that they were attacking Huckabee for. The program was a merit-based scholarship. Kids had to meet certain grade levels, basically straight A's to EARN the scholarship. ANY STUDENT who EARNED those grades received the scholarship. No kids were excluded because of the illegal AND the kid had to have been enrolled in the school system for his entire school career. He couldn't move in the last year and get it. So, NO CITIZEN lost anything. If a kid is a law-abiding, straight A student, don't we want those type of people as citizens of this country? According to the laws currently on the books those students can NEVER become US citizens. The DREAM Act was part of the recent immigration bill that would have allowed them to become citizens but alas . . .
ladiesbballcoach Posted November 30, 2007 Posted November 30, 2007 I would think that your statement that "no citizen lost anything" might be a little misleading. I assume that these merit-based scholarships are funded with tax dollars, correct? Lottery and gambling proceeds.:lol: Actually, I don't know the answer to that question. I do understand that no kid who earned the scholarship was denied the scholarship. And I agree that it is a very interesting debate that I had never thought of till the debate. But as I said before, don't we want to encourage kids that are law-abiding and Straight A students to stay in this country? Now I would add that if they are illegals on scholarship, they should be required to be going through the citizen process while in college. By the end of the 4 years, they should be citizens.
ladiesbballcoach Posted November 30, 2007 Posted November 30, 2007 According to the laws currently on the books those students can NEVER become US citizens. The DREAM Act was part of the recent immigration bill that would have allowed them to become citizens but alas . . . Well that is stupid.
ladiesbballcoach Posted November 30, 2007 Posted November 30, 2007 Are you saying that public schools should not allow these kids to enroll? I would assume that they are not getting state funds to educate the child. Interesting question.
HHSDad Posted November 30, 2007 Posted November 30, 2007 NOT TRUE on the program that they were attacking Huckabee for. The program was a merit-based scholarship. Kids had to meet certain grade levels, basically straight A's to EARN the scholarship. ANY STUDENT who EARNED those grades received the scholarship. No kids were excluded because of the illegal AND the kid had to have been enrolled in the school system for his entire school career. He couldn't move in the last year and get it. So, NO CITIZEN lost anything. If a kid is a law-abiding, straight A student, don't we want those type of people as citizens of this country? So, you're saying that Arkansas has a bottomless pot to draw from? And don't you think this just encourages more immigrants to break the laws of this country to reap its benefits?
Hearsay Posted November 30, 2007 Posted November 30, 2007 Are you saying that public schools should not allow these kids to enroll? No, not if the state that public school is domiciled in has already allowed the student to enroll in publich high school there.
ladiesbballcoach Posted November 30, 2007 Posted November 30, 2007 So, you're saying that Arkansas has a bottomless pot to draw from? I am saying, being a teacher, that there will be a limited pool of kids that will be earning this distinguished and this scholarship.
ladiesbballcoach Posted November 30, 2007 Posted November 30, 2007 No, not if the state that public school is domiciled in has already allowed the student to enroll in publich high school there. My first instinct is to also say if a school/state does allow it, they lose federal funding. Now, the problem is that you have uneducated youth roaming the streets, unsupervised. Which can translate into more crime.
HHSDad Posted November 30, 2007 Posted November 30, 2007 Are you saying that public schools should not allow these kids to enroll? I'll say it. No, these families should receive NO financial assistance of any kind from the tax coffers.
.png.ffa34568722b20f38e3c3ecfcb9a2cd2.png)
.thumb.jpeg.8d2472ffe992a9c5c22b4582f4881eab.jpeg)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.