Saturday, January 10, 2009

January 10, 2009
To: The taxpaying legal residence of the United States
From: Alexis de Tocqueville
Re.: a compromised secondary education system
Hello. I am the spirit of Alexis de Tocqueville. I was a French Socio- Political Philosopher who lived from 1805 to 1859. I toured the United States and visited in depth with the leaders of the nation at that time. I also visited and interviewed many commoners as well. I researched your country as it had never been before. I compared your state- based experiment to the societies of Europe and what I found was its imminent fall to mediocrity and its complete inability to escape from mediocrity. Never to soar to its full potential and never to burn hot enough to explode into ruin so it may embrace a re-birth.

This week I read an article from which caught my interest on two fronts. It addressed state college tuition standards and illegal immigration. From this article I offer you these three quotes:


The states of Illinois, Kansas, Nebraska, New Mexico, New York, Oklahoma, Texas, Utah, and Washington provide discounted college tuition to illegal aliens.” (

This first quote concerns me as to what fiscal responsibility standard is being established for their legal taxpaying state residents? Are they telling their constituents “All things being equal,……We value the education of the illegal alien more than that of our fellow citizens who happen to reside one state away within the United States.”
The 1996 federal illegal Immigration Reform and Responsibility Act says,’ an alien who is not lawfully present in the United States shall not be eligible on the basis of residence within a state (or political division) for any post- secondary education benefit unless a citizen or national of the United States is eligible for such benefit.’(

This quote explains to me that your federal legislators addressed this issue and voiced that those who legally belong abroad are not entitled to a state subsidized tuition discount paid for by the lawful taxpayers of your country. Should a child born in the state of Florida, schooled in Florida and accepted to a college in Washington state be expected to pay more tuition than a child born in a foreign land who broke the U.S. laws by sneaking into the U.S. to reap the benefits of our school system? The U.S. child is not only a citizen, his or her family paid federal taxes.

In short, if you legally have a child in the United States who is ready to go off to college, you shouldn’t be expected to pay MORE than a college bound child who is doing so illegally.

And third.

“The state of California argued that its tuition discount was not a benefit because it did not provide monetary payments, and that it was based on the students having attended a California high school for three or more and having graduated from the school. Thus, it wasn’t a special benefit just for immigrants.”(

What happened? Oh, ………. if the higher court comes down against your wishes you simply modify the definition of the words or terms used to walk-around that silly U.S. Supreme Court. Who are they anyway?
The word “benefit” means what we say it means if it helps us do what we want. As long as you legal taxpayer types who live in funny places like Mississippi pay more to go to college here.
You who snuck-in under the fence and work under the table without Social Security numbers and such, come on in and get that degree. Heck, you didn’t pay taxes for those first 12 years of school, why shouldn’t you get the best rate possible for your college?”.
From the Afterlife,
Alexis de Tocqueville