<p>Folks, I thought the reason the residents of a state got the instate tuition rate was that they are paying taxes – you know, income taxes, sales taxes, property taxes— to that state.</p>
<p>My dau is applying to another state’s university, and our own state’s, The difference in costs to us would be 15k; guess which one is higher. I have told her many times that we would pay way more as out of staters to the other place because the school is paid for by the taxes of the state’s residents. That is all residents, not necessarily only the legal residents or naturalized/born there citizens. </p>
<p>Whether or not their parents are there legally, the family has been paying taxes to the state every time they make a purchase, eat out, it’s in their rent (they do pay the property tax within their rent; the landlord does not eat it), use a service that is taxed, and so on. They have been supporting their state university system just by living there. Perhaps they have been doing so for the student’s entire life. </p>
<p>If residency, not citizenship, is the standard for instate tuition, then why shouldn’t all the residents of the state be eligible?</p>
<p>"You must not work in a public school in Texas. Every morning
“Honor the Texas flag; I pledge allegiance to thee, Texas, one state under God, one and indivisible.”</p>
<p>Don’t message me with grammar or historical facts. This is state law."</p>
<p>No kidding, really? Then why was Texas’ governor saying that Texas could divide into 4 states if it wanted to, a couple years ago? If it’s indivisible? </p>
<p>(Yeah, I already know he hadn’t read the US Constitution, which sides with that Pledge, no dividing into more states once you are in).</p>
<p>You’d probably assume each student would stay in the system for 4-5 years, so the number would actually be lower. Divide 25,000 into 5 years (I imagine if they’re illegally here they won’t have as much money and would be more likely to take lighter loads to allow them to work part time and/or support family) and you get 5,000 students a year. So instead we’d only be supporting 50,000 unique students over 10 years (though that would be equivalent to 250,000 years of tuition).</p>
<p>JRZ, my girlfriend actually brought made me think about something I hadn’t before. If these people are stealing SSNs and are being paid legitimately, that means they’re having state and federal taxes plus medicare and social security taken out of their paychecks. I imagine they’re not filing for a refund at the end of the year, so they’re actually paying out considerably more in taxes than if they were legitimate citizens.</p>
<p>(Also, as a quick story, one of her friends was a top ten student in her class, raised by a single parent, and didn’t find out they were illegally in the country until they started filling out the FAFSA.)</p>
<p>(Yeah, I already know he hadn’t read the US Constitution, which sides with that Pledge, no dividing into more states once you are in).</p>
<p>I assume that you are referring to Article IV, section 3, which requires the consent of Congress. In fact, Congress gave that consent in the original statute annexing Texas.</p>
<p>It can’t be simply that paying taxes to the State of CA equals entitlement to the instate rates. Otherwise, visitors and vacation home owners would also be eligible, and if they are wealthy vacation home owners, they could easily be paying much more in tax dollars than an illegal full-time resident.</p>
<p>I have a relative who lives in California. His ex-wife had moved to Texas when their D was a sophomore in high school. </p>
<p>This made her entitled to pay OOS rates to UC or CSU schools. She opted to stay in Texas to attend college.</p>
<p>She can’t get in-state CA rates, even though her dad is paying taxes and was paying child support to the family. </p>
<p>Residency issues tend to deal with primary residence and students cannot usually obtain residency if they are coming to school, unless they live in the state for a certain amount of time before attending and then set up permanent residency based on many rules and restrictions. Going back home for the summer doesn’t count. It’s very difficult to gain residency status in the State of CA.</p>
<p>“It can’t be simply that paying taxes to the State of CA equals entitlement to the instate rates. Otherwise, visitors and vacation home owners would also be eligible, and if they are wealthy vacation home owners, they could easily be paying much more in tax dollars than an illegal full-time resident.”</p>
<p>The student must attend a CA high school for at least three years, and graduate. It’s a residency (legal or not) requirement, not a citizenship requirement.</p>
<p>Thanks, vossron, I was responding to JRZmom’s and RacinReaver’s ostensible attempts to rationalize why illegal immigrants are entitled to in-state rates. , i.e., because they pay CA taxes. That line of argument doesn’t work.</p>
<p>That’s one rule that needs to change: denying state residency tuition rates to the child at a public university in the non-custodial parent’s home state notwithstanding the fact that the non-custodial parent contributes a substantial amount of $$ support to the child.</p>
<p>I’ve been told that New York State, i.e. SUNY, is one of the few places where a child can get resident tuition based upon the non-custodial parent’s domicile.</p>
<p>Obviously the majority of Californians (not all, and some will speak up to contradict) support this unanimous decision; remember, we’re progressive compared to the rest of the country, having re-elected almost all of our Dems this month. We choose not to punish the kids for their tax-paying parents’ actions. Private schools as well support these kids, treating illegals as foreigners, but funding with private instead of federal funds. It’s law-and-order ideology vs. doing-what-seems-right.</p>
<p>Illegals can get a taxpayer ID number from the IRS; the IRS will take anyone’s money. ;)</p>
<p>They aren’t “illegals”. They are undocumented PEOPLE. PEOPLE. I find the punitive attitudes of many of the posters here disconcerting. These people HAVE PAID TAXES - they pay their sales taxes, and they pay property taxes (through the rents they pay) and they are residents. Their kids deserve a chance.</p>
<p>Sorry, I don’t say “citizen people” or “resident people” either, so “illegals” doesn’t bother me, and don’t link it to a punitive attitude. “Undocumenteds” would be okay, too.</p>
<p>If you are not legally residing in the country you can not be legally residing in any one of it’s states or territories. What is so hard to understand about that?</p>
<p>Pronouncements to the opposite lends to the ever increasing contempt for a judicial/law enforcement system that no longer holds the law as its fist master.</p>
<p>I’m a lifelong resident of CA, property owner and a landlord here in CA. I can tell you with property values the way they are my renters are paying virtually nada towards the property taxes on my properties. Additionally, there are fine universities in Mexico and South America if we are speaking of Latino illegal immigrants. Why can’t these ‘children’ attend the schools within their home countries? I am currently paying tuition at a CA public university with costs going up every quarter. Please! Can’t we serve those in CA who’ve been here legally the whole time?</p>
<p>Probably, but not necessarily. I can envision a not-far-fetched scenario in which the parents of these kids pay no CA taxes at all, and the children will still be entitled to attend CA colleges at in-state rates.</p>
<p>If say, a Chinese boy or Mexican girl went to live with his/her wealthier aunt and uncle in CA the summer prior to sophomore year, and lived as their dependent, never having a job (because they have no SS#), and graduated from that CA hs, they can attend CA colleges at in-state rates. Isn’t that right? Neither they nor their parents would have paid any taxes to the State of CA.</p>
<p>^ Policy needs to be set for the majority of cases; there will always be some possible edge cases, but they don’t need to control the overall policy. IMHO.</p>
<p>It is certainly fair to let these kids attend and pay in-state tuition. Their parents do the same thing other “legal” CA residents do — they work, pay taxes, try to support their families, tend to their communities, etc. A person from Nevada (as someone before said) should pay out of state tuition in CA because they don’t live in CA, don’t contribute to CA, don’t work or pay taxes there etc. </p>
<p>Do you know what it means to be “illegal”??? I bet most of you don’t. It can mean one who has crossed the boarder without documentation or it can even be the spouse of a US citizen who’s visitors visa has expired, or a company executive who’s visa expired or one who came in undetected and is seeking political asylum, or a number of other situations. These kids are not responsible for the actions of their parents. How can one even think of holding these kids accountable. How incredibly lacking in compassion! it’s not fair to let one reside in your state, contribute to your state, pay your taxes & because they lack a civil document (yes, immigration is a civil matter, NOT A CRIMINAL MATTER) you want to charge them double - triple tuition. Oh please!</p>
<p>Support the kids! Don’t support creating a second class citizenry. Support ALL kids who go for higher education. It’s something to celebrate. Shame on you who choose to stick it to the innocents!</p>