RICK PERRY AND TEXAS IMMIGRATION CHOICES
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111903791504576591203453529380.html?KEYWORDS=rick+perry%27s+pragmatism
Wall Street Journal: Review & Outlook Texas’s Immigration Choices Rick Perry’s pragmatism draws fire from his presidential rivals.
“Most children of illegal immigrants – some 73%, according to the Pew Hispanic Center – are U.S. citizens by birth. But as of 2008 there were 1.5 million children in the U.S. who are illegal. The Supreme Court has ruled that these children are entitled to a K-12 education. Lawmakers in Texas, which is home to the nation’s second-largest illegal population after California, determined that tuition breaks for these residents made economic sense. So did the state’s business community, which lobbied for the measure on the grounds that a better educated population would translate into stronger economic growth.
State tax officials estimated that increased college enrollment by illegal immigrants would be budget neutral. It would bring in new students who would pay tuition, and those students who graduated would produce increased tax payments to the state. A college graduate’s lifetime earnings are nearly double those of someone with only a high school diploma. The Dallas Morning News has reported that in 2009 illegal immigrants who were taking advantage of the tuition subsidy were 1% of the state’s million-plus college students. The program is hardly the draw on state coffers that critics have claimed.”
During last week’s GOP debate, Ms. Bachmann repeated her wish to build a fence “on every inch of the southern border,” which may be an applause line but differs little on substance from Mr. Perry. The Texan has said repeatedly that he favors physical barriers where they can be effective but that some areas lend themselves better to “boots on the ground” or virtual fences such as motion detectors and remote-control cameras.
Not that additional security measures will solve the problem. For at least two decades, and especially since 9/11, U.S. immigration policy has focused on throwing more resources at border security. Multitiered fencing was erected in San Diego and El Paso under President Clinton. Border patrol budgets ballooned under President Bush. Deportations have increased under President Obama.
All of this has had some deterrent effect, and combined with the struggling economy has in recent years slowed the flow of illegals to modern lows. What drives those who are still crossing the border illegally is the dearth of legal ways to enter the country for people looking for work. Under our current system, it is nearly impossible for a typical Mexican to migrate to the U.S. legally within his lifetime. If the U.S. supplied enough work visas to meet demand, fewer migrants would have reason to enter illegally, and border resources could focus on genuine threats.
Mr. Romney’s outrage that Texas offers college tuition subsidies to illegal residents is also opportunistic, assuming it is sincere at all. In 2001, Texas passed the nation’s first state law that allowed undocumented high school graduates to pay in-state tuition at public colleges and universities. To qualify, students have to attend school in the state for at least three years and file an affidavit saying that they plan to seek permanent residency.
Mr. Perry didn’t help himself by calling his critics on this issue heartless, and he could do a better job of explaining the program’s rationale. Lower in-state tuition rates at public colleges and universities aren’t akin to welfare for the indigent; they’re not means-tested. They’re a discount for residency. The same logic applies to hunting or fishing licenses.
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.
Most children of illegal immigrants – some 73%, according to the Pew Hispanic Center – are U.S. citizens by birth. But as of 2008 there were 1.5 million children in the U.S. who are illegal. The Supreme Court has ruled that these children are entitled to a K-12 education. Lawmakers in Texas, which is home to the nation’s second-largest illegal population after California, determined that tuition breaks for these residents made economic sense. So did the state’s business community, which lobbied for the measure on the grounds that a better educated population would translate into stronger economic growth.
State tax officials estimated that increased college enrollment by illegal immigrants would be budget neutral. It would bring in new students who would pay tuition, and those students who graduated would produce increased tax payments to the state. A college graduate’s lifetime earnings are nearly double those of someone with only a high school diploma. The Dallas Morning News has reported that in 2009 illegal immigrants who were taking advantage of the tuition subsidy were 1% of the state’s million-plus college students. The program is hardly the draw on state coffers that critics have claimed.
These columns have long supported a policy of generous immigration but without welfare benefits, and one reason the politics of immigration is less contentious in Texas than in California is because it has long practiced something close to that policy. Coming from a Governor who signed the precursor to ObamaCare, Mr. Romney’s criticism of Texas for modest tuition subsidies is especially rich. Mr. Perry’s immigration positions reflect a Texas political consensus that makes far more sense than his opponents’ demagoguery.
Comments are closed.
