November 17, 2010

Patrick pushes for in-state tuition for illegals

Boston Globe story.   Are  your surprised????
Consider this.  You live in New Hampshire, but work in Massachusetts so you have to pay Massachusetts Income taxes.  If you son or daughter want to go to UMASS-Lowell, for example, you can not get in-state tuition rates.

Make any sense at all to do this when we are facing a 2 billion dollar budget deficit?? 


Brendan Melican said...

Not surprised at all, it makes perfect sense.

Bill Randell said...


This seriously makes sense to you?


Steve Foley said...

If you live in Mass (with or without the federal government's permission) you are paying Mass income tax, Mass sales tax, and contributing to your local real estate tax either directly or through rent payments.

Brendan Melican said...

Absolutely. It's the only logical, fiscally responsible approach unless we were to scrap in-state tuition rates for all.

First we have to look at the 'send them all home crowd', that concept is a logistical and financial impossibility. Anyone who thinks the idea of locating, identifying and transporting 10+ million undocumented people is even possible, is watching way to many crime dramas on TV. Once you get this BS line of reasoning off the table, we're left with having to solve problems like big boys and girls.

So who are we talking about here? People looking to better themselves through education; primarily young people. So if we reason the concept of rounding up millions of people off the table, and we're now stuck with having to actually deal with a marginal population; would you prefer that population remain marginal in productivity? Hopefully we all know by now an educated population is better for society than an uneducated population.

If the argument is taxes. Well, then shouldn't we be keeping renters from taking advantage of our education system? Or are we just ignoring that undocumented workers also pay taxes?

Look, I know it's an unpopular take, but were talking about young people here, most of whom don't seem to know their immigration status. How does punishing them for their parents actions make sense on any level? The other issue is the 14th Amendment. Since birthright citizenship dosent kick in till the age of 21, wouldn't we want to make sure the qualifying individual attains citizenship with at least a decent chance of success in life? It's one of those areas we need to be focused on long term cost/benefits, we know poorly educated people cost society more on average. So why stack the decks against all of us?

rockin randall said...

Go smoke some more POT Brendan.

Bill Randell said...


Unlike what Martha Coakley thinks, I think it should be illegal to be illegal in Massachusetts.


Jahn said...

Brendan said:

a. Anyone who thinks the idea of locating, identifying and transporting 10+ million undocumented people is even possible, is watching way to many crime dramas on TV.

Here's an idea for locating them. Give them the tuition deal and when they show up at school riding in their pimped out SUV with $5,000 spinner rims and in their $300 Nikes and with their $200 napsacks...just bust em as approach the school.....the parents in the SUV, too. Sell off the SUV and hire buses, boats, or aero-plains to get them back to to where they came from. USP's new marketing is slogan is "We Love Logistics".........well I luv Illegal Alien Logistics. Think of the upside for Worc Airport if all illegals busted in New England were sent to Worc. Airport (b/c it's centrally located) for deportation back to wherever

And Brendan, b/c you raise the logistics questions, please explain to me the "logistics" of Mass taxpayers paying for this education as well the logistical & financial issue of expanding colleges to handle the increased student population.

Jahn said...

Brendan said;\

So who are we talking about here? People looking to better themselves through education; primarily young people.

Who we're talking about here is people looking to allegedly better themselves by sucking even more money from Mass taxpayers

Isnt it a bit presumptuous to state that these are people looking beter them selves through education. Many college kids go to college just to party and flunk out...witness QCC or HC. If they truly want to beeter htemselves....fine......get a job(s), a bicycle, and some bus company passes like I did when I went to college.

Brendan not everyone is meant to go to college. We've already tried that same idea by giving the "Marginal population" their own homes and look where we are now.

Brendan also said:

"are we just ignoring that undocumented workers also pay taxes"?

Again a bit presmputous that illegals:

(1) work and
(2) Pay taxes

Jahn said...

Brenda said:

"but were talking about young people here, most of whom don't seem to know their immigration status"

Let me get this straight...they dont know their own immigration status....yet they are college material? Surely u jest?

Dial 1-800 Call-ICE. They will tell you your immigration status for there's an illegal alien freebie I can live with>

Brendan then said:

"How does punishing them for their parents actions make sense on any level? "

How does punishing out of state residents with higher tuition than what illegals would be req'd to pay make any sense? Good Lord, how does Brendan make any sense?

Would it be fair to say that instead of punishing them for their paresnt actions, that their parents should have stopped by Pleasant & Hudson Streets instead.

Jahn said...

Finally Brendan said:

"we need to be focused on long term cost/benefits,"

Long term cost benefit analysis would definitely say it's more financially sound to round em up and deport them.

Brendan, the last few days I have accidentally been tuned to WTAG at 305pm b/c I had Rush on during the previous hour(s). Believe it or not I didnt switdth to WCRN as I usually do at 300pm for Howie. The reason I stayed tuned to WTAG is b/c Levy is evidentally out of town. BTW i think Levy s/b deported from WTAG and I will personally handle the logistics & finances of that .

After listening to you and Messina(?) today, I am convinced that your diatribe re illegals tuition was all merely a ruse to get attention. Please tell me you're not really as foolish as you pretended to be whilst up on Anusbumskit (sp) Hill

Brendan Melican said...

That's a perfectly reasonable thought, Bill. Unfortunately unless you have a plan to round up 10+ million people and ship them overseas, it's also irrelevant. I think we're all eager for the Feds to interviene on some level here, but in the meantime we have to deal with things on a state and local level, within the scope of the law. So the question then becomes 'do you want people who are already here to be as productive as possible, or do you want to further marginalize them?'

Bill Randell said...


Jahn is fire up.. Brendan, I don't see how not wanting to give illegal aliens in-state tuition equates to me wanting to round up and ship all the illgeal aliens back to their home country.

My thoughts are simple. First, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts has financial difficulites and should only give "breaks" to legal residents. Not illegal residents or people who libe in New Hampshire but work in Massachusetts.

Secondly, I think the word "illegal" means illegal.


Brendan Melican said...

Jahn, you're beyond incoherent. Seriously, I have no idea what you're trying to say. What little is decipherable is at the same time 100% demonstrably false.

Bill, you can't be a Massachusetts citizen just a Massachusetts resident. There is no category of 'illegal resident', either you are or you're not; citizenship is assigned by the feds. So if you can't make the population disappear due to logistics and you're truly concerned with the economic costs of illegal immigration on the state, wouldn't it make sense to provide the population with the one thing that could possibly lower both their economic and social costs to society?

Bill Randell said...


I am not saying they can not go to state run colleges. I am saying they can not receive the benefits of lower tuition since they are illegal.

To me the word "illegal" means something. At the same time if you want to give in state tuition rates to illegal immigrants how can you not give this same discounted rate to out of state residents that work and pay taxes in Massachusetts?


Brendan Melican said...

For the same reason you don't get to vote in MA if your primary address in in NH. Or why you can't be appointed to the Worc Airport Commission if you live in Holden. We're talking residency, not citizenship; one is a state/local matter and one is a Federal matter. Each carry independent privileges and responsibilities; and they have little to do with one another. You can be a "legal" resident of MA, meaning you simply fit the definition of someone who resides in the Commonwealth and still be an illegal immigrant to the United States, one is not dependent on the other. State laws and Federal laws don't need to play well together, that's why we have different levels of enforcement between the jurisdictions. We can only deal with residency on the state level, since citizenship is a federal matter. And the idea of educating people who want an education makes good fiscal sense for the state, so until the feds get off their ass and deal with their side of the issue, we need to look out for MA. If anything you're simply talking an increase in revenue from the new students, with no increased economic burden.

Brendan Melican said...

I misspoke on the state citizenship, but it actually reinforces my point. Lets make this easier and go to the actual laws.

PART I, TITLE I, CHAPTER 1, Section 1 of the MGL defines citizenship as: All persons who are citizens of the United States and who are domiciled in this commonwealth are citizens thereof.

For residency, the Secretary of States office defines residency like this:
There is no formal procedure for establishing a legal residence in Massachusetts. Voter registration, automobile registration, a driver’s license, the appearance of a person’s name on a city or town street list, and rent, utility, mortgage or telephone bills normally provide tangible proof of residence. However, individual public or private agencies or institutions may have their own requirements for proof of residence. A one-year residency requirement is imposed in order to qualify for state tuition rates at state colleges and universities, and a six-month residency is required for community colleges.

So until we match the state citizenship laws with the residency requirements, you can be one, both or neither. Also, there is no reason why someone originally from NH couldn't get MA tuition rates, they just need to prove residency in MA first.

Incoherent Jahn said...

Brendan Melican said...
Jahn, you're beyond incoherent. Seriously, I have no idea what you're trying to say. What little is decipherable is at the same time 100% demonstrably false.

Brendan, please tell me what's incoherent and also what parts are false and what parts you cannot dechipher, so I can go back and re-write the other parts (the un-dechipherable ones) such that you can understand them. Brendan, did you go to St Johns or Somerville public schools, too. Just kidding !!!!!!

I wonder if anyone else has problems understanding what I wrote. If so, please speak up.

Thanx in advance to Brendan and others for helping me clear up what some deem incoherent and/or not decipherable.

Another great Nov day. Nuttin like working outside today in the afternoon with 7 non stop hours of Rush and Howie :) Well maybe not 7 non stop hours.........but you knwo what I mean

Undecipherable Jahn said...

Let add to teh above ..... or 3 hrs of Rush and 3 hours of Brendan and Messina :)

Brendan Melican said...

Jahn, not meant as an insult. You just tend to bounce from one point to another rapid fire. It's easy to mistake your humor for salient points. Could be me!

To demonstrably false claims, the one that jumped out was a burden on mass taxpayers. We're not talking free college ed here, just the same discounted rate you or I would receive. Framing this as a burden is disingenuous at best, if anything it would potentially relive a burden. While I agree higher ed, especially in it's current diploma mill form, is not for everyone. Education overall is, and for the life of me I can't see the long term benefits of denying someone who wants to better themselves, the opportunity.

Rockin Randall said...

Rewarding bad / illegal behavior is something that liberals and conservatives will always disagree on.

Brendan you are suggesting that we reward the illegal behavior because it feels like the right thing to do.

That is like th federal minimum wage act. It is law now and it feels good but it really hurts the country and goes against the principles on which this great nation was founded upon. Not to mention that is it unconstitutional as well.

I forget what was sighted in the news the other day that pointed out that in-state tuition for illegals would actually be illegal, unconstitutional (at the state
level) and would be discrimination.

But what the hell should we care about details like that for?

Jahn said...

I am telling you folks, the continual disregard for the rule of law in this city, state and country is like adding gasoline to an already buring fire of nat'l discontenet.

More and more peopel are sayign to themselves...WTF????.....why should I follow the rules when our leaders dont.............If calif. doenst get a wait and see the anarchy that will follow....ditttos NJ, NY, and oterh states