Mitt Romney’s Slight-of-Hand Tactics

October 20, 2011 by Patriot 10

Shame on Gov. Mitt Romney for skewing the facts. In recent GOP Presidential debates Romney has slanted the facts about Texas’ in-state tuition for illegal immigrant students. If presidential candidates want Americans, including Texans, to consider them credible, then the very least they should do is state the facts correctly. But, if they, who want all Americans to believe they are honest, are not willing to paint an honest picture themselves, then we will.

The facts are:  Of the 1.3 million students attending college in 2010, only 1.2 percent (16,476) of children of illegal immigrants met state requirements to receive tuition breaks according to the affidavit path, which requires each student to agree to follow a path to legal citizenship. Examining the numbers of illegal immigrants awarded the in-state rates in 2010 more closely, 73 percent averaged a $2,600 reduction per year or less. The remaining 27 percent averaged approximately $10,000 per year.

Romney clearly stated, “Four years of college, almost $100,000 discount if you are an illegal alien and go to the University of Texas.” Granted illegal immigrant students who attended the University of Texas in 2010 received about $90,800 (approx. $22,000 per year) over four years slightly below the $100,000 Romney claims. But, only 612 of the 16,476 received the tuition break. While Romney’s statement regarding UT is mostly true, Romney strategically chose to use UT as his backdrop because UT’s tuition break is the highest among Texas public universities and, therefore, skewed the truth of illegal immigrant students seeking a college education in Texas. Breaking the numbers down even further, less than four percent of illegal immigrant students received UT in-state tuition rates last year.

According to the Austin American Statesman’s Politifact Texas, “The vast majority of affidavit students in Texas last year got an average in-state tuition reduction of $1,600 to $2,600. If they got that rate for four years, the total “discount” would be $6,400 to $10,400.”

One thing politicians should before speaking is make sure they have all the facts. Furthermore, it would serve all of them well to learn about the unique dynamics of each state. The bottom line is Texas has a border problem through no fault of its state government which has dedicated hundreds of millions of Texans hard earned tax dollars trying to defend a border with very little, if any, help from the federal government. Educating children of illegal immigrants, while clearly, confusing to some, will in the long-run prevent Texans from spending more of their hard earned tax dollars providing for them in other ways. At the very least, they will become legal citizens and will be in a far better position to provide for their selves.

It would be nice if Texas was not faced with this problem. But one thing politicians, either fail to or refuse to grasp is that these children are brought here by their parents who are seeking work. Illegal immigrants do not cross into this country for the sole purpose of having their children attend school in Texas. The cold hard fact of the matter is they come here for work and bring their children with them. To paint this already big picture even bigger: The Pew Hispanic Center reports that 1.65 million illegal immigrants made up 6.7 percent of the state’s total population in 2010.

If Gov. Romney is hoping his slight-of-hand tactics in skewing the facts will help him garner support, he might re-think that. Americans are tired of slight-of-hand tactics and want a president who is Honest.

Round Two and Arizona Comes

 Out Swinging

August 28, 2010,  Patriot 10

Arizona Governor Jan Brewer isn’t backing down in the fight over illegal immigration. Thursday, lawyers for the governor filed the first brief appealing a ruling by a U.S. District Judge which put the most controversial elements of Arizona’s new immigration law on hold. A ruling Governor Brewer says “has caused irreparable harm” to Arizona residents.

Brewer is seeking a reversal of last month’s ruling by U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton in the 9^th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Brewer insists Bolton abused her discretion by applying the wrong legal standards and basing her ruling on speculation by the federal government that it would be harmed by Arizona’s law. Brewer also states Bolton ignored key provisions of federal law that do allow states to enforce immigration law.

In her ruling, The Associated Press reports Bolton blocked provisions of the law that requires immigrants to obtain or carry immigration registration papers and that require police, while enforcing other laws, to question people’s immigration status if there is a reasonable suspicion they’re in the country illegally. However, Bolton did allow other portions of the law take effect last month.

The state of Arizona has been in a battle with the U.S. Justice Department over its tough immigration law – a law other states are now trying to follow.

NEW IMMIGRATION MEMO SURFACES: GOP WANTS ANSWERS

By Patriot 10

A group of Republican lawmakers wants answers and they want them now. Seven GOP Senators who sit on the Judiciary Committee are requesting the panel’s chairman, Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), convene a hearing. The group wants to question administration officials about a newly surfaced draft memo about immigration. The GOP seven hope to pry answers from the Obama administration about its immigration policy and they’re demanding Congress investigate.

It’s believed the undated draft memo was written about four months ago. Four staffers and legal counsel who work for U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) wrote the eleven-page document. The USCIS is a sub-unit of the Department of Homeland Security. The memo was addressed to the agency’s director, Alejandro Mayorkas, but allegedly was never sent. Washington correspondent, James Rosen, reports the authors of the memo titled “Administrative Alternatives to Comprehensive Immigration Reform” say they’re not advocating making “a non-legislative version of ‘amnesty’” which is widely available to scores of illegal immigrants. But, in the memo, they reportedly proposed, “in the absence” of congressional action on immigration reform, a number of “administrative relief options to…reduce the threat of removal for certain individuals already in the United States without authorization.” The memo also stated USCIS “can extend benefits and/or protections to many [such] individuals and groups.”

A Department of Homeland Security official reportedly stated the document was only a draft memo and should not be attributed to actual Obama Immigration Policy. In a recent television interview, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs stated he had not seen the memo and doubted it had circulated at the White House. He also said the Obama administration does not, in any case, support “amnesty” for illegal immigrants.

The seven Republican Senate Judiciary Committee members, led by Jeff Sessions (R-AL), have asked Sen. Leahy to probe the origins and effects of the memo. The GOP letter stated, “We are very concerned about the options outlined in the memo and are troubled that the executive branch could be engaged in an effort to inappropriately expand its authority to ensure illegal immigrants are not removed from the United Sates and are given access to various immigration benefits, including potential green card status.” This letter comes on the heels of an earlier one written in late June by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and six other GOP senators to President Obama. It was Grassley’s office who obtained the secret USCIS memo. In that letter, Grassley and his colleagues did not report they were in receipt of the memo but did express concern over “reports” the administration was secretly considering implementing the very policies that the USCIS memo outlines. Those policies include deferred deportation of illegal immigrants and revised guidelines for other immigration tools, such as parole-in-place. Grassley has stated the White House never responded to the June letter.

Illegal Aliens Descend on Our

Nation’s Capital to Demand Amnesty

Thousands of illegal aliens and their supporters traveled to Washington, D.C. last weekend to demand amnesty from lawmakers and President Obama.  They staged a so-called “March for America” on Sunday, March 21, on the National Mall and have planned lobbying visits to Capitol Hill today (Monday).  Tens of thousands of activists came from across the country to march through the streets of the capital and rally for amnesty, carrying banners from their home countries and signs such as, “You need us as much as we need you,” and “No human being can be Illegal.”  (The Associated Press, March 21, 2010).  Frustrated with the lack of action on “comprehensive” immigration reform, these pro-amnesty protesters hope to inspire the president and Congress to address their concerns this year. 

President Obama has shown a renewed interest in fulfilling his campaign promise to enact amnesty legislation by meeting with lawmakers and amnesty advocates in recent weeks.  (See FAIR’s Legislative Update, March 15, 2010).  Obama did not attend Sunday’s demonstration, but he did send a message of reassurance to the illegal aliens and their supporters through a video message presented on giant screens at the National Mall that he would fix our “broken immigration system.”  (The Associated Press, March 21, 2010).   The crowd, which included illegal aliens required to wear tracking devices as they are already facing deportation, cheered for Obama.  (The Washington Post, March 22, 2010).

Other speakers included long-time amnesty advocate Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.), Roman Catholic Cardinal Roger Mahoney of Los Angeles, and an array of African-American leaders including the Rev. Jesse Jackson and N.A.A.C.P. president Benjamin Jealous.  (The New York Times, March 21, 2010).  Rev. Samuel Rodriguez, the leader of the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference, went so far as to compare the push for amnesty by illegal aliens to the civil rights movement, saying, “This is our Selma.”  Id.  The rally was largely overshadowed by the health care debate taking place in the Capitol, but amnesty advocates sent a clear message that they won’t excuse delays on enacting “comprehensive” immigration reform for much longer and will vote accordingly in the November elections.  (Reuters, March 19, 2010).

courtesy of Fair (Federation For American Immigration Reform)