illegal immigrants on education

I read the editorial written by my classmate, J. Houston, entitled, California Gives Illegal Immigrants In-State Tuition. I agree with Houston that illegal immigrants should not be entitled to the same benefits that in-state students are given on the college level.

However, I feel that the problem starts with allowing illegal immigrants the right to attend grade school.  I do not understand how they have the right to go to grade school in the first place since technically they are here illegally. I am aware that there was a law passed by the Supreme Court in 1982 giving the children of illegal immigrants the right to attend grade school, but to me it just does not make sense nor seem right.

By not paying taxes and getting the same opportunity to attend public schools, it is unfair to the American citizens and legal immigrants.  If an immigrant can take the necessary steps and deal with the financial hardships to become citizen but not reside in the State where they would like to go to college and have to pay out-of-state tuition, then to me this does not seem fair that an illegal immigrant be provided the opportunity to go college and pay in-state tuition without becoming a citizen.

As my classmate had stated, I too agree, that this does provides illegal immigrants with more incentives to come to the United States. The Federal Government invests millions, if not billions, on border security and then allows this to take place. If this is the case then why not give illegal immigrant children the right to enter the United States and receive a free and/or discounted education provided by the legal citizens of this country, instead of wasting time and tax payer’s dollars to try and stop them from coming into the United States, in the first place.

There is much debate over this subject not just in California but in many other states as well. My hope is the right thing is done for the sake of the American people, who get up each day, pay their taxes and try to make a positive impact on this country.

Earmarks good or bad

The article titled Top Senate Republican endorses halt to earmarks is about a very controversial topic that will affect many people in different ways. The Senate members that promise their districts these funds for projects will jeopardize the trust that they have from their constituent groups that support them. In turn, I think it will give some people a feeling that they were lied to and may affect the outcome of future elections.

I do agree with the Senators that say it is out-of-control spending, but I do not believe that earmarks need to be ceased completely. I believe that they should be reviewed more thoroughly and see what kind of benefits theses projects will bring to the states that support them. I do not agree with President Obama   completely on this issue. I think that the American people do want to see change in federal spending because it is taxpayers’ money and it will make a difference, even if it is only a slight one.

Like Massachusetts, I think that other states should use their funding for projects that affect the American people and enables them to see their tax money at work. These controversial earmarks that are used for personal gains, inappropriate projects and needless spending have given a bad name to earmarks in general. The majority of the Senate is using this federal funding for good such as to benefit their constituent groups, the people that support them and using them on funds for the projects they promised if elected.

It will also be very tricky for the Democratic Party to fill their earmark requests, like the article states, if most of the House is controlled by Republicans. This is why I feel that there has to be another way to solve where earmarks are being spent without eliminating them all together. In this case, I believe there has to be a mutual agreement between the two parties.

I understand that Congress has put stricter measurements on earmarks but I think they should just tighten up a little more and not over due it. By doing this it will relieve a lot of tension between support groups and the Senate and will still give the Senate the opportunity to aid the projects that Americans want to see accomplished with their tax dollars.

In my fellow classmates editorial blog titled, Unemployment Hurts he stresses on the pros and cons of the unemployment rates. I do agree with the fact that employment rates are slowly increasing from earlier years. In one of my recent blog’s, I researched the ways that the Recovery Act and many different tax credit programs are helping families and small business recover from the strains of the fallen economic situation that this country is in.

I agree that the political parties are pointing the finger at the opposing parties’ opinions, but merely as means of attack advertising to win more votes during the most recent elections.

Getting political leaders together as one government seems to be impossible because they would have to agree on every situation at hand and neither political party believes that the views of the opposing party would work. Political parties have different priorities they want to see accomplished when they are voted into office. If one party is in office for one term and loses in the next election, then the priorities will change.

I have to disagree with the argument that the stimulus program was just brownie points to win the favor of the public. I have noticed the economy slowly rising out of the shadows of the recession. For example, I have recently seen numerous construction projects, which to me is not a sign of recession but rather states using federal and state taxes to provide jobs to people that would probably be unemployed.

Unfortunately stimulating the economy will take time and has put stress and burdens on many families and businesses. I believe the Recovery Act has provided many different programs to help these families and business get through this tough economic time and as i.house has said, “only time will tell”.