A 1982 law - a legal instrument - makes it legal for "illegals" to enroll in publicly-funded, i.e., property taxpayers, schools. So, if they're illegal, what are they doing here? Answer: technically, breaking the law.
Yes, ignorance is more "expensive" than education. But aren't we sending a message to less developed countries that, hey, it's okay, come on over - or, worse yet, send your kids packing unaccompanied - and you can have almost anything you want?
I'm very open to anyone's comments that might help expand my view on this.
Yes, ignorance is more "expensive" than education. But aren't we sending a message to less developed countries that, hey, it's okay, come on over - or, worse yet, send your kids packing unaccompanied - and you can have almost anything you want?
I'm very open to anyone's comments that might help expand my view on this.
4
This article embodies the reason I read the NY Times every single day. The original article. on the hardships and barriers of immigrants who try to send their children to school, should win the Pulitzer, because it obviously helped wake up the public to this outrageous injustice to children, and therefore influenced a needed change. I'm proud of you, New York Times, and congratulations to the journalists involved.
The issue of accommodating childeren of illegal immigrants into schools
brings out a fundamental flaw in how schools are funded in this country.
We pay insanely high property taxes that are growing faster than inflation and wages due to the carving of richer enclaves into a myriad school districts and the massive duplication of the bureaucracy that ensues.
The bigger social cost is the disharmony begotten by racial and economic
segregation. Nationwide, New York state, is ranked first one in de facto
segregation of schools. It has the highest rate of black students in
high-minority schools and the lowest rate of black exposure to white
students.
Consolidation of the vast majority of school districts (by a factor of
10!) would bring lower costs for all. Of course, house prices are in
lockstep with the prestige of local schools, so all those in richer school
districts would be opposed to such a step, but perhaps not, if they
thought a bit more wisely of their children's future.
brings out a fundamental flaw in how schools are funded in this country.
We pay insanely high property taxes that are growing faster than inflation and wages due to the carving of richer enclaves into a myriad school districts and the massive duplication of the bureaucracy that ensues.
The bigger social cost is the disharmony begotten by racial and economic
segregation. Nationwide, New York state, is ranked first one in de facto
segregation of schools. It has the highest rate of black students in
high-minority schools and the lowest rate of black exposure to white
students.
Consolidation of the vast majority of school districts (by a factor of
10!) would bring lower costs for all. Of course, house prices are in
lockstep with the prestige of local schools, so all those in richer school
districts would be opposed to such a step, but perhaps not, if they
thought a bit more wisely of their children's future.
As an individual who grew up in Western NY, we all thought you had to be of Polish descent to attend Cheektowaga schools. The Buffalo suburbs are very segregated by national origin.
Now the folks in Amherst must be doing backflips about having to allow anyone who is not wealthy into their schools. It looks like some of the developers from that area of town screwed up and forced the town board to approve apartments. The better off suburbs on the Southside of have only approved elderly housing. Otherwise, the only rental property is two family homes, where the owner has to live one site.
Now the folks in Amherst must be doing backflips about having to allow anyone who is not wealthy into their schools. It looks like some of the developers from that area of town screwed up and forced the town board to approve apartments. The better off suburbs on the Southside of have only approved elderly housing. Otherwise, the only rental property is two family homes, where the owner has to live one site.
1
The people who can afford to do so will move out of the school district entirely and/or put their child in private schools. They will also most likely vote against public school taxes every chance they get. So the performance of the public school systems will decline and class/ethnic segregation will increase.
Good job!!!
Good job!!!
6
As a retired NYC Public School Teacher I am familiar with the large number of illegal immigrant children in the US today. NYC has long struggled with large numbers of children from all corners of the world. The suburban districts ignored the problem and only thought that it was a NYC problem.
A couple of years ago I sat next to an assistant superintendent of a Long Island School district at a charity dinner. We spoke about ESL and support services (I was teaching 1st grade students in my classroom from Nepal and Tibet. You can't get an ESL teacher for that). The assistant superintendent spoke about the high cost of services. She mentioned that a South Asian family had moved to her district and was living and working about a store in the commercial strip in town. All 3 children in the family had IEPs (Individual Education Plans) that would be costly to service. The superintendent found money to offer the family to move out of the district. The money that was given was in the thousands of dollars. We are not talking people who were illegals. The district paid to have them move to another district so they would not have the burden of servicing their children. I had to keep my mouth from falling open. The suburban districts waste tons of money on administration. You could have a district with only two or three schools and it needs a superintendent, assistant superintendent and all kinds support for the administration.
A couple of years ago I sat next to an assistant superintendent of a Long Island School district at a charity dinner. We spoke about ESL and support services (I was teaching 1st grade students in my classroom from Nepal and Tibet. You can't get an ESL teacher for that). The assistant superintendent spoke about the high cost of services. She mentioned that a South Asian family had moved to her district and was living and working about a store in the commercial strip in town. All 3 children in the family had IEPs (Individual Education Plans) that would be costly to service. The superintendent found money to offer the family to move out of the district. The money that was given was in the thousands of dollars. We are not talking people who were illegals. The district paid to have them move to another district so they would not have the burden of servicing their children. I had to keep my mouth from falling open. The suburban districts waste tons of money on administration. You could have a district with only two or three schools and it needs a superintendent, assistant superintendent and all kinds support for the administration.
5
I lived the first twenty years in the village of Hempstead The population of that village is now nearly entirely minority, with blacks slightly over half the population and people of Central American origin most of the remainder. The reason for the presence of a substantial number of unaccompanied children from Central America is obvious. Immediately adjacent to Hempstead is the village of Garden City, an almost entirely white upper middle class community. Garden City has a long history of discrimination, starting with an effort to prevent Jews from moving into the community. For a long time the police there had a policy of stopping all cars with black passengers driving through the village. I don’t know to what extent these abuses continue. The injustice of having Hempstead bear the entire burden while letting Garden City get off completely free as a reward for its past bad behavior is obvious.
7
It's not a question of race or skin color. The financial burden of the high cost of educating our children has now been largely transferred from the federal and state governments to local communities, such as Hempstead, where residents pay very high taxes to educate the children in those communities. If the illegal minors do not have to prove they legally reside in these communities in order to attend their schools, no other child should either. People should just be able to head to any suburban community and demand that their children attend their schools. The rules and laws should equally apply to ALL.
8
This is pure bunk. I lived in East Meadow, immediately on the Meadowbrook Parkway border with Uniondale in the 1950's and 60's. We watched Uniondale change dramatically from a solid middle class neighborhood to a town dominated by minorities. The same happened in Hempstead. Along with this transformation came more poverty, more subsidized housing, more welfare and more educational failure for the young people of Uniondale. The fact that Garden city has retained its excellence in its public schools. Quality of life and housing values is to the credit of its residents, not because of racism.
5
Garden City's anti-Semitic and anti-black policies are well-documented in old newspaper files as well as court records. For example, at one time the few Jewish residents had to pursue a law suit all the way to the Court of Appeals to be able to build a house of worship. The argument that its schools produce high-scoring students solely by their excellence and has nothing to do with its exclusionist policies with regard to residents defies belief. Why should Garden City entirely escape the cost of accommodating refugee children when it is visited on its neighboring poor community. And when I lived in Hempstead Uniondale had a lot of poor white residents.
I used to read comments from the anti-immigrant people, just to try to understand, but I grew bored with the rhetoric, "What part of illegal" and all that, seems they are obsessed with the law if and only when it pertains to brown people they dislike, I haven't read those comments for years, I'm doing so today and yawn, they are exactly the same as they were 8 years ago.
3
Professor Cuomo wants 50% of a teacher's evaluation to be based on standardized test scores. Small wonder no district wants to touch these kids!
7
I live in one of these cited districts and have been a school administrator responsible for homeless students in several other districts (none of whom are on the list). My home district has a 3% poverty rate, schools that would be the envy of many and consistently score among the highest-achieving districts in the region. My district is FAR wealthier than neighboring districts that welcome ALL children by obeying a Supreme Court decision from 1982. My children had friends and class mates in the Urban-Suburban program (who got on buses before 6:00 to come to our schools) and students who were immigrants, learning English in High School.
So as a parent and educator, let me be clear: the vast majority of districts enforce residency rules WITHOUT going broke and without excluding children whose homes in other districts have been destroyed by fire, whose parents have lost jobs and now are "doubled up", who have moved to the area to take often low-paying or off-the-books jobs or who lack Social Security cards and visas. This has nothing to do with President Obama, folks, and everything to do with districts choosing not to obey laws that their neighbors obey.
So as a parent and educator, let me be clear: the vast majority of districts enforce residency rules WITHOUT going broke and without excluding children whose homes in other districts have been destroyed by fire, whose parents have lost jobs and now are "doubled up", who have moved to the area to take often low-paying or off-the-books jobs or who lack Social Security cards and visas. This has nothing to do with President Obama, folks, and everything to do with districts choosing not to obey laws that their neighbors obey.
6
Not true. The big urban districts accept any child bc they want the federal money that comes with that child.
Then they cram the kids into crowded classes with barely-trained TFA teachers.
The schools who "welcome all children" are simply doing it bc they make money off them.
The suburban schools, generally less corrupt and more accountable to parents, won't do this. They won't cram a 35th kid into a classroom and staff it with a cheap, untrained teacher.
Then they cram the kids into crowded classes with barely-trained TFA teachers.
The schools who "welcome all children" are simply doing it bc they make money off them.
The suburban schools, generally less corrupt and more accountable to parents, won't do this. They won't cram a 35th kid into a classroom and staff it with a cheap, untrained teacher.
There is something that would be more useful than scolding the school districts that were reluctant to enroll more undocumented students. How about suggestions for how these districts (many of which already were struggling financially) can provide for dozens, even scores of new midyear enrollees, most of whom have need for ESL or remedial help, without sacrificing their ability to provide decent schooling for existing enrollees? There is essentially an unfunded mandate being placed here.
15
My nephew went to register for school this year but, the doctors office had forgotten to print off one of his shot records.He was not allowed to register,nor was he allowed to meet his teacher without proof of that shot.He had been illegal he would have been able to register.What other country in world puts the rights of people in the country illegally ahead of their own citizens?
If we want changes in this country we will have to vote people that will override these unelected judges!
If we want changes in this country we will have to vote people that will override these unelected judges!
20
that comparison does not make sense, your child did not have less rights than an undocumented child, an undocumented child would also have been excluded if they could not document vaccination. I live in NYC and am a public school parent and I prefer that schools be available for all children regardless of immigration status.
4
All children should be vaccinated. If necessary, the schools should arrange for and finance vaccinations.
That would solve the problem that bjrose describes, unless bjrose's nephew's real problem is that his parents wouldn't permit a vaccination based on anti-scientific foolishness and willingness to unnecessarily and negligently receive and pass diseases between unvaccinated persons.
That would solve the problem that bjrose describes, unless bjrose's nephew's real problem is that his parents wouldn't permit a vaccination based on anti-scientific foolishness and willingness to unnecessarily and negligently receive and pass diseases between unvaccinated persons.
1
Your doctor's office is at fault here, not undocumented children. What you are implying is that because of poorly done paperwork on your side you are somehow underated by families looking for something better for their chilren. Maybe find a better doctor.
1
Our public education system is already the laughing stock of the first world. And every new story I read in the national media drags it further down the rabbit hole.
8
The old saw applies here, if you think education is expensive wait until you see the bill for ignorance.
6
Makes sense, I mean in many parts of our country illegal immigrants have become a protected class to which the laws and rules the rest of us are expected to obey don't apply to them.
24
I see two completely different issues being combined here.
First, school districts should not be requiring proof of citizenship or legal status under the existing law. While I have some disagreements with that law, it is the law and needs to be followed.
Second, however, there is not only a right but an obligation for districts to demand proof of residency in the district. This can be in the form of a lease agreement, rent receipts, utility bills, or any other form of documentation.
A district has the obligation to enroll any and all children living in that district. They do not have any obligation to enroll any children living outside of the district. In order to fulfill this obligation, prospective students need to simply prove that they live in the district. I had to do so each time my children started school, I see no reason why everyone else should not do so.
First, school districts should not be requiring proof of citizenship or legal status under the existing law. While I have some disagreements with that law, it is the law and needs to be followed.
Second, however, there is not only a right but an obligation for districts to demand proof of residency in the district. This can be in the form of a lease agreement, rent receipts, utility bills, or any other form of documentation.
A district has the obligation to enroll any and all children living in that district. They do not have any obligation to enroll any children living outside of the district. In order to fulfill this obligation, prospective students need to simply prove that they live in the district. I had to do so each time my children started school, I see no reason why everyone else should not do so.
22
Do not let these illegal children into your schools, its just not right. I think the editors of this paper need their heads examine. Where is the money going to come from to educate these children? We need a revolt in this country.
14
Jerome, the money to educate illegals comes from huge increases in your school taxes which are linked to property you own. Some of it is probably coming from your state & Federal tax obligations as well.
Even though my kids are longer school age, I'm perfectly willing to pay school taxes for children who are here in the country legally. It's not clear to me why I should have to pay for children who are here illegally. What part of "illegal" does this country not understand?
The only people who have time to revolt or protest are generational welfare recipients & illegals. Since I work for a living & have limited time, I've chosen to write/call my congressional representatives several times a month on my days off. Can't hurt, might help. I've also joined NumbersUSA.
Even though my kids are longer school age, I'm perfectly willing to pay school taxes for children who are here in the country legally. It's not clear to me why I should have to pay for children who are here illegally. What part of "illegal" does this country not understand?
The only people who have time to revolt or protest are generational welfare recipients & illegals. Since I work for a living & have limited time, I've chosen to write/call my congressional representatives several times a month on my days off. Can't hurt, might help. I've also joined NumbersUSA.
14
if you think we need a revolution and the target should be poor undocumented children, where have you been, have you seen what banks have gotten away with and been rewarded, instead of punished? I suspect you are motivated by a perceived racial and cultural dislike of immigrants.
5
you joined numbers USA? Tanton's group, they are affiliated with the Klan and the minutemen who have been involved in the murder of 9 year old Brisenia Flores, you should not be proud of that.
4
What amazes me the most is the cheapness of all these complainers.
Cheap is what you do when you run out of ideas and compassion.
Cheap is what you do when you want to horde in the land of plenty.
Cheap and petty, narrow and regressive - not much of a legacy.
Creating a better society is based on education, not narrowness of thought. It is really shameful to hear so much bigoted thought (yes !) from these LEGAL, TAX PAYING citizens.
Cheap is what you do when you run out of ideas and compassion.
Cheap is what you do when you want to horde in the land of plenty.
Cheap and petty, narrow and regressive - not much of a legacy.
Creating a better society is based on education, not narrowness of thought. It is really shameful to hear so much bigoted thought (yes !) from these LEGAL, TAX PAYING citizens.
9
It's not liberal to tax (take people's money by rule of law) people to pay for action's that are in conflict with prevailing law. Equal protection under the law is the foundation of liberal societies. This looks more like tyranny than liberalism!
12
People in the suburbs around NYC are paying outrageously high real estate taxes, and they are primarily doing so in order to maintain high standards in their public schools. How would you feel as a parent, and an overtaxed resident, if you were to be informed that certain vital school programs your children were enrolled in, were being cut or reduced in order to pay for the education of illegal minors who cannot even prove they reside in your town? I'm sure you would be thrilled.
22
thats not the way it works and you know it. I am a parent and overtaxed and there is no reason why I would object to my tax money going to educate children, it's one thing that is always worth it.
4
Seems the benighted benevolence of the political ruling class and the citizens' wallet, i.e., tax payers who support them, are not on the same page anymore, especially when it comes to the limits of our welfare state and its obligations to its non-citizens who entered without knocking first. Took long enough.
But now that they are inside the city, in such great numbers, what to do?
But now that they are inside the city, in such great numbers, what to do?
4
Funny how, in the NYT, the descriptor 'illegal' is applied only to the schools' policies, while the same, accurate term is not used to apply to the immigration status of the students; in an Orwellian handy-dandy, the word has been swapped out in favour of 'undocumented', as if they had just left their drivers' license in their other pants.
I don't know if you understand the easons for district residency requirements. At least here in NJ, we require students to reside legally in the towns where they attend school, or to pay tuition. Better districts have a problem with people from other towns registering their kids with phony addresses, which pushes up the district's costs with no corresponding tax dollars to offset it.
I agree it would be nice if everything were free. (You can start with your paper, which now costs me more than $400 a year for weekend print delivery.) However, it doesn't work that way. And districts that tolerate illegal immigrants will pretty quickly find themselves overcrowded, overwhelmed, and broke. (Oh, and with regard to 'unaccompanied' - don't wail and moan when you print more articles on the plight of kids sent alone across the border. You're encouraging it.)
I don't know if you understand the easons for district residency requirements. At least here in NJ, we require students to reside legally in the towns where they attend school, or to pay tuition. Better districts have a problem with people from other towns registering their kids with phony addresses, which pushes up the district's costs with no corresponding tax dollars to offset it.
I agree it would be nice if everything were free. (You can start with your paper, which now costs me more than $400 a year for weekend print delivery.) However, it doesn't work that way. And districts that tolerate illegal immigrants will pretty quickly find themselves overcrowded, overwhelmed, and broke. (Oh, and with regard to 'unaccompanied' - don't wail and moan when you print more articles on the plight of kids sent alone across the border. You're encouraging it.)
34
Not Orwellian at all. Undocumented immigrants are that, undocumented. They have broken no laws. INS rules, yes, but avoiding/breaking rules is not illegality.
School officials have violated the law and court directives. That is illegality.
School officials have violated the law and court directives. That is illegality.
5
You are obviously not a doctor juris. They broke the law as compiled in the Immigration an Nationality Act of the United States.
4
Dr. Bob, entering this country without inspection means you're breaking a FEDERAL LAW and committing a federal crime, one punishable by several months in prison, a large fine, and deportation. Lying to get a NON immigrant visa you intend to violate is immigration fraud and a felony. Illegal aliens also go on to commit other crimes if they stay here, including working illegally, using stolen or fraudulent SS numbers, and committing fraud on the I-9, the latter 2 of which may be felonies. Likewise, being deported and re-entering illegally is also a FELONY.
9
I still don't get it, why forced to pay for the education of children who do not legally reside in their towns, nor are legally part of our nation? Should their real estate taxes go up to pay for this, or should educational programs in those schools be cut in order to pay for the education of these children? To me, schools are obligated to verify that they are serving the interests of the community they are funded by.
31
Okay, let me see if I've got this straight. School systems that adhere to our laws are actually breaking the law. Got it.
27
Schools have certain requirements of enrollees in order to protect their taxpayer base, and to prevent the spread of disease; the most evident and logical. Also are there any local and States rights in regard to these imposed issues?
12
14th Amendment impositions of Equal Rights under State law, always trumps any so-called local and States rights 'issues'. The 14th Amendment was created to prevent States from discriminating against minorities. Undocumented children are minorities who are, themselves, innocent of any crime. But it is a crime for the government and school districts to deny children a public education.
1
I have nothing against immigrants, legal or otherwise, after all, this is a nation of immigrants. However, if they use our schools, they should have to pay the same amount in taxes as everyone else.
16
"...they should have to pay the same amount in taxes as everyone else. "
They do, my friend, given their income, at far higher rates that the 1%'ers do. If taxes are your real concern, then join those who wish to tax the wealthy at rates similar to that of other "wealthy" countries.
They do, my friend, given their income, at far higher rates that the 1%'ers do. If taxes are your real concern, then join those who wish to tax the wealthy at rates similar to that of other "wealthy" countries.
5
Dr. Bob, how are they "paying" those taxes? Using STOLEN SS numbers? That put the people whose numbers they've stolen in a world of hurt with the IRS. Or, if they're paying under ITINs, they're getting back everything they pay in taxes as well as several thousand dollars from our pockets under the Additional Child Tax Credit. In 2010, that amounted to $4.2 BILLION to illegal aliens just under this credit.
18
Duh! FICA and other taxes are held back at pay day. If one is working under a false SS#, the govt. keeps the money and the worker never sees it in SS benefits. What a deal for the rest of us. Google how much in real dollars it costs to work without papers.
This makes perfect sense to Democrats and liberals, who will allow anyone to flaunt our immigration laws in order to sign up potential future voters. These kids and their parents are not "undocumented". They are criminals who need to be deported. Our school taxes are high enough already. We do not need to be educating people who entered our country illegally. and who feed off the taxes of American citizens.
38
One more way to encourage continued illegal immigration into the US.
38
It seems that many of the people commenting here are a little confused as to how property taxes that fund schools work. If an undocumented immigrant family lives in a school district, they are also paying property taxes even if they are renting. This is the case because the cost of property taxes to the landlord is incorporated into the rent. So they are not in a different position from that of everyone else in the school district.
12
You need to read the article. The schools are not allowed to ask for proof of residency.
6
Property taxes pay for a small portion of school expenses and federal dollars are tight and budgeted to previous enrollment. if enrollment goes up 25% due to illegals, the LEGAL students are impacted by a shortage of teachers and time- many/most illegals are poorly educated and speak leetle English, requiring additional staff over and above what should be required per student- taxes become almost irrelevant. Not to mention the most illegals are NOT paying federal taxes.
15
You seem to be the one who is confused, or not a careful reader. Even if you are renting, regardless of your immigration status, you can present proof that you reside in the house that you are renting. There is no reason your immigration status would come up as an issue. Your rent receipt, and possibly a supporting document such as a utility bill, should do the trick.
However, from the article:
'The challenges were especially acute in suburban areas where *unaccompanied immigrant children* have recently arrived'
They're not joining families who are renting in the districts. They are definitely in a different position.
The state and courts are conflating two different issues. If the districts are requiring the immigrants to provide proof of their immigration status, that's one thing, and has been found illegal. However, again, from the article:
'The state compliance review followed an article in The New York Times in October, which found that several suburban districts had contravened federal guidance by requiring immigrant families to provide*proof of district residency* before their children were enrolled.'
Not the same thing - as I explained supra, an illegal immigrant family that is renting can provide proof of *residency* without its immigration status arising.
In its zeal to promote illegal immigration, the NYT muddies the linguistic, legal, and logical water - or pulls the old shell game.
However, from the article:
'The challenges were especially acute in suburban areas where *unaccompanied immigrant children* have recently arrived'
They're not joining families who are renting in the districts. They are definitely in a different position.
The state and courts are conflating two different issues. If the districts are requiring the immigrants to provide proof of their immigration status, that's one thing, and has been found illegal. However, again, from the article:
'The state compliance review followed an article in The New York Times in October, which found that several suburban districts had contravened federal guidance by requiring immigrant families to provide*proof of district residency* before their children were enrolled.'
Not the same thing - as I explained supra, an illegal immigrant family that is renting can provide proof of *residency* without its immigration status arising.
In its zeal to promote illegal immigration, the NYT muddies the linguistic, legal, and logical water - or pulls the old shell game.
13
These kids shouldn't be rejected, they should be deported back to their home country. It is not the American taxpayers responsibility to educate every child in the world who makes his way here, not to mention most of these aren't even children anymore. Liberals who want to educate illegals' children should be made to pay into a special liberals tax. I'm sick of them wasting my tax dollars supporting all their fruitless money wasting social engineering schemes.
34
got proof of your ancestors immigration status?
This type of hatred and the narrowness of thought is what has sent this country on the downward trend.
This type of hatred and the narrowness of thought is what has sent this country on the downward trend.
7
take you head out of the pie please and get real. Use your tax dollars not mine to support illegal immigration.
9
Great idea! Can we require those who supported George W. Bush's war on Iraq to pay a special tax to pay for that war, including those neat (but kind of pricey) Tomahawk missiles, not to mention the death benefits for the troops we lost and the on-going medical care for the wounded?
3
The point is that all children of school age are required to attend school. Do we really want roving gangs of young undocumented children wandering the streets all day because they're not allowed in class? Do we want them growing up not learning English nor any skills that will make them into productive members of society? Do we want legions of disaffected youth in our midst as potential recruits for agitators and terrorists? Schools will also at a minimum make sure that the children receive adequate nutrition and mandatory vaccinations, so they won't be vectors for disease. We can argue about whether they should be over here in the first place, but as long as they are in our communities, it's for our own good that they are placed in a positive learning environment and kept from causing trouble.
9
No, we simply want LEGAL citizens and LEGAL immigrants to benefit from our system, and people who are here ILLEGALLY to either pay in full for the gift of education, or go back to the country they have LEGAL residence in.
23
So we enforce the laws requiring children to be educated but ignore the ones requiring families to be here legally?
Kudos on figuring out a way to call opponents of amnesty terrorists though!
Kudos on figuring out a way to call opponents of amnesty terrorists though!
13
Just by reading the article, it appears that the illegal status of the children is not the issue with the schools, but confirmation as to whether they live in the school district, a requirement of EVERY child who attends every local public school.
Having children in a school district whose family pays property taxes to another jurisdiction (whether through renting or property ownership) is an on-going issue affecting schools for decades. If a school district get money from the town(s) to educate xxx-number of children, and substantial more students than that wind up attending the school, who is to pay for the extra number?
Many school districts, particularly in NJ, have had to be extra-vigilant on this matter going back 30 years that I know of, yet the Obama Administration has decided that this form of local self-government MUST GO, to be replaced by federal government fiat, in order to move forward with a political agenda.
Having children in a school district whose family pays property taxes to another jurisdiction (whether through renting or property ownership) is an on-going issue affecting schools for decades. If a school district get money from the town(s) to educate xxx-number of children, and substantial more students than that wind up attending the school, who is to pay for the extra number?
Many school districts, particularly in NJ, have had to be extra-vigilant on this matter going back 30 years that I know of, yet the Obama Administration has decided that this form of local self-government MUST GO, to be replaced by federal government fiat, in order to move forward with a political agenda.
34
A social security card or a visa stamp might verify whether a person is legally in the country but, they say nothing about where they live. I live in Nebraska and have an SSN. Does that mean that my children should be able to attend school - where ever??
1
Your knee-jerk attack on Obama would tend to discredit the rest of what you say even if your opinion expressed more than unwillingness to show any charity toward your fellow human beings in need. Yes, unattended Central American children are human.
2
The 2003 Grutter v. Bollinger affirmative action case wasn’t the “victory” that affirmative action advocates like Benjamin Mueller make it out to be. It actually was the death knell for affirmative action. The 2003 Supreme Court ruling permitted the University of Michigan to continue considering race in its admission process on a temporary basis. In writing the majority opinion, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor famously wrote: “The Court takes the Law School at its word that it would like nothing better than to find a race-neutral admission formula and will terminate issue of racial preferences as soon as possible. The Court expects that 25 years from now, the use of racial preferences will no longer be necessary to further the interest approved today.” Justice O’Connor did not give the university 25 years to continued race-based admissions; she said the court expected race-based admission to end before 25 years were out. Of course, Michigan residents ended race-based admissions in 2006 by voting to ban affirmative action. The Supreme Court will use the Texas case to ban racial preferences in college admissions nationwide.
1
What makes this country great is that it was built of immigrants and education among arts and other things. Let's keep that tradition alive. How can this be fixed?
3
With legal immigration and only legal immigration.
13
And so now as they flout the rules with fake addresses they can crowd the schools with the kids from out of district as the kids within district find themselves without a seat. Smarten up NYC, smarten up USA. There's nothing wrong with rules that are fair to residents and citizens.
22
I'm a NYC parent and Im not afraid of the scenario you describe, most of us actually want our children to go to school in our districts, I have no fear of an influx of children from different neighborhoods, thanks but no thanks to your fear mongering.
1
Hempstead schools had to add more than 1,500 students this year and the activists are complaining about this district not being able to absorb them all?!
What about the other students that are legal immigrants, and citizens that suffer from overcrowded classrooms, and the taxpayers that are overtaxed by a huge increase in the school population and need to fund additional space and teachers?
We can't sustain this - yet there is no rational discussion about where these funds are coming from. Whether it's the local taxpayers or the federal government providing reimbursement through a wider net of taxpayers, it comes down to the question: Should illegal immigrants get rewards and benefits that are denied or delayed to our own citizens? I say no.
The State officials are targeting a less prosperous district knowing they don't have the resources, or as affluent and politically engaged parents that wouldn't stand for classroom overcrowding and sharply increased school costs.
Let's call the beneficiaries of this failed policy out: the establishment Republicans whose businesses benefit from low cost labor and the activists and Democrats in bed with them that believe that they will get a whole new set of Latino voters when they are given amnesty. The losers: legal immigrants and the average citizen.
What about the other students that are legal immigrants, and citizens that suffer from overcrowded classrooms, and the taxpayers that are overtaxed by a huge increase in the school population and need to fund additional space and teachers?
We can't sustain this - yet there is no rational discussion about where these funds are coming from. Whether it's the local taxpayers or the federal government providing reimbursement through a wider net of taxpayers, it comes down to the question: Should illegal immigrants get rewards and benefits that are denied or delayed to our own citizens? I say no.
The State officials are targeting a less prosperous district knowing they don't have the resources, or as affluent and politically engaged parents that wouldn't stand for classroom overcrowding and sharply increased school costs.
Let's call the beneficiaries of this failed policy out: the establishment Republicans whose businesses benefit from low cost labor and the activists and Democrats in bed with them that believe that they will get a whole new set of Latino voters when they are given amnesty. The losers: legal immigrants and the average citizen.
31
One little-known fact is that schools with increased enrollments are not allowed any exemption from the 2% tax cap to afford those students. This little "gotcha" was intended to placate districts upstate that have decreasing enrollment figures. My guess is that many of those folks are heading to the south of New York to make a living. And so the cycle continues to the glee of the crooks in Albany.
2
What better way to bankrupt every community in New York state.
23
Schools can asked students who are illegal immigrants for proof they live in the district, but not for proof of citizenship or for identification documents only citizens can obtain. Few illegal immigrants have trouble showing proof of residency. Schools can require parents of students who are U.S. citizens to present their birth certificate, but cannot require students who are illegal immigrants to present their child’s birth certificate. In states like Texas or California that have large illegal immigrant population, this isn’t a problem since illegal immigrants are well aware they don’t have to be citizens to attend U.S. schools. As New York illegal immigrant population continues to grow, it won’t be a problem there either. If New York schools do not set up bilingual education course and classrooms to teach students in Spanish as well as English, the courts will force them to do so. The courts will also force them to pay bilingual teachers more than other teachers. In Texas, bilingual receive annual stipends of $1,500 to $2,500 over their regular teacher salaries. The El Paso Independent School District, once of the nation’s largest school district, now requires all school principals to be fluent in Spanish. It gave principals who spoke only English three years to become fluent in Spanish.
3
No one in this country should have to speak anything other than English in order to get a job, unless the job is specifically "translator." This is one more outrage against the overtaxed working and middle class LEGAL residents of this country. I suspect that the people behind this mockery of justice are either childless or sending their children to elite private schools.
And no, in response to another commenter, we don't want gangs of unsupervised children roaming the streets - if they're illegal aliens, we want them gone, period. Stop enabling these invaders!!! Furthermore, I've never had a job where I didn't have to show proof of citizenship to get hired - why should it be any different for parents enrolling children in U.S. taxpayer-supported public schools!?
And no, in response to another commenter, we don't want gangs of unsupervised children roaming the streets - if they're illegal aliens, we want them gone, period. Stop enabling these invaders!!! Furthermore, I've never had a job where I didn't have to show proof of citizenship to get hired - why should it be any different for parents enrolling children in U.S. taxpayer-supported public schools!?
19
Sigh, these are not children "roaming the streets" these are the same children that live in our communities there is no reason for you to fear them. In most parts of the world people speak more than one language the U.S. has prided itself on speaking only one and now that has come back to hurt it's own citizens. If someone offers you a chance to learn another language, take it!
2
Wait until private schools somehow become compelled to accept illegal/non-residents
13
Won't happen unless the family can pay the tuition. And if there ever were a federal attempt to take over private schools, there will be no more private schools.
1
I believe that immigrants's children should be allowed to enroll in public school. Who knows who will be paying taxes and into social security in the future? However, I do not believe they should be entitled to ESL. As children, they will learn, or should learn, English very quickly, due to exposure to English speaking children. If they get held back a year, then they get held back a year while they are learning. There are a lot of ways to be "fair" and giving non-tax-payers a free public education is more than fair; in return, they will have to work harder at learning English if that is not the language the speak.
7
But don't we WANT them to learn English, as soon and as well as possible? I think it's to OUR benefit.
3
Maybe the miscreants who thought this up can PAY for these kids to go to my schools. I surely CANNOT and SHOULD NOT.
14
Everyone must show proof of residency. I believe this can be a lease or even a utilities bill. You cannot have children attend school in a district in which they do not reside. Period.
20
WHY? Question mark.
Districts are arbitrary and a line of division. Inclusion is beneficial.
Districts are arbitrary and a line of division. Inclusion is beneficial.
P.S. Please excuse the typo my prior comment. It is Article 26 in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
1
It is quite upsetting and disillusioning to see such venom against these children being spewed here in the NYT, especially when put into the context of why they left their home countries and what horrors they went through to get here.
Reality check: Property taxes pay for education in this state. These students are now living with families who at the very least rent homes here, in which case they are paying the property taxes that pay for the schools in the areas in which they live.
Reality check: How many of our immigrant grandparents or great grandparents were drawn to this country because of horrific conditions in their home countries, received an education here, and went on to contribute to the progress and innovations that we take for granted today? Demanding incarceration for this segment of our society costs a whole lot more than educating them.
Reality check: It is also likely that many of the wrathful commenters here benefit from the employment of the families of these children, e.g., construction, agriculture, housekeeping, and other minimum wage service jobs that non-immigrants would never consider now. How does denying their children an education benefit society in the long run?
It is indeed a sad day to read such vitriol against the most vulnerable in our society written by those who would deny a most basic universal right to these children. Please read Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which the United States approved in 1948.
Reality check: Property taxes pay for education in this state. These students are now living with families who at the very least rent homes here, in which case they are paying the property taxes that pay for the schools in the areas in which they live.
Reality check: How many of our immigrant grandparents or great grandparents were drawn to this country because of horrific conditions in their home countries, received an education here, and went on to contribute to the progress and innovations that we take for granted today? Demanding incarceration for this segment of our society costs a whole lot more than educating them.
Reality check: It is also likely that many of the wrathful commenters here benefit from the employment of the families of these children, e.g., construction, agriculture, housekeeping, and other minimum wage service jobs that non-immigrants would never consider now. How does denying their children an education benefit society in the long run?
It is indeed a sad day to read such vitriol against the most vulnerable in our society written by those who would deny a most basic universal right to these children. Please read Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which the United States approved in 1948.
9
" Failed to provide adequate instruction to non-English speaking students" As I read this statement it actually states, take time and inadequate resources from the majority of the student body. This is akin to drilling holes, in an already flooded, and sinking lifeboat! If these advocacy groups, with their tax exempt status, want to really want to help these children, maybe they should make honest efforts to get these children up to speed in the language used in the school districts! More focus has to be placed on the educational standards for the majority of the students, these students are less and less prepared to face, even the minimal of academic achievement.
Just as an observation, as American born Baby Boomer's age, their ranks in various groups, are being filled, in a large part, by non English speaking, immigrant's, that refuse to focus on the entire picture. Education should be for every child, with all the special interest groups, demanding a slice of the pie, public education will become a useless relic!
Tom Franzson. Brevard. NC
Just as an observation, as American born Baby Boomer's age, their ranks in various groups, are being filled, in a large part, by non English speaking, immigrant's, that refuse to focus on the entire picture. Education should be for every child, with all the special interest groups, demanding a slice of the pie, public education will become a useless relic!
Tom Franzson. Brevard. NC
3
Illegal immigrants are here because they cheated the system. I don't wish for anyone to be stuck in poverty, fighting crime and disease while living in substandard conditions. On the other hand, the solution is not to invite the whole world into our classrooms for education and medical facilities for healthcare. Our nation has a lot to offer, but its resources are not endless. The influx of not hundreds, not even thousands, but millions of illegal immigrants is putting a serious strain on these resources. We have immigration rules in place for a reason. Forcing American taxpayers to foot the bill while schools struggle to find desks, supplies and teaching staff to accommodate children who are not here legally seems unfair.
53
Yes, but if we're really serious about a final solution of the white problem, we will have to use every possible method for utilizing their tax payments to fund their replacements.
2
How about each school district just billing the Federal Government for the additional costs of providing free education for illegal alien children. The Federal Government would then reduce any Foreign Aid for the country the illegal alien is from and return it back to the school district. And in cases like Mexico where the costs incurred exceed the Foreign Aid any new illegal alien students from Mexico would be deported asap. This is both sensible and fair to the school district's taxpayers who are footing the bill for foreigners who shouldn't be in this country in the first place.
30
If someone with a child from another country was to enter the US legally and tried to enroll his/her child into the public school system for, say the year they were spending abroad in the US, they would actually have to pay the cost it takes that school to educate that child (this amount differs obviously by city and state). This could easily be close to $25,000 or more depending on where you are. The school is also not legally bound to accept that child into their system. In what universe does this scenario make sense? The US continues to provide reasons for illegal immigrants to come and to stay in the US. I speak to this issue as a legal immigrant to the US who went through the legal system and got my citizenship 17 years later. Stop punishing the legal immigrants and rewarding the illegal ones.
23
I don't believe that your assertion about a someone legally here for say, a year having to pay the cost of educating their children.
Can you refer us to the statute that backs up your claim?
Can you refer us to the statute that backs up your claim?
1
I am a staunch Democrat and am always one for immigration which is the life blood of country BUT THIS???!
Why are on earth do we have immigration laws? With intense dismay I am totally against the President's insistence on letting illegals stay. Either its up or out or might as scrap the existing laws and let anyone as they please because that is what is happening now. Good luck America. 'Give us your tired, your poor......."
Why are on earth do we have immigration laws? With intense dismay I am totally against the President's insistence on letting illegals stay. Either its up or out or might as scrap the existing laws and let anyone as they please because that is what is happening now. Good luck America. 'Give us your tired, your poor......."
26
A country overrun by tired, poor, and huddled masses will become a country of tired, poor, and huddled masses. Is that what we want to be? We wring our hands over all the poor in this country, and then import more. Where is the logic in this? People who make excuses for border jumpers should never complain about lack of jobs, money, or the shrinking middle class.
We should always know everything possible about anyone we allow into this country, and only under dire circumstances should we allow poor, sickly, and criminal people. What does Mexico have over Obama (and Bush '43) to force them to take those Mexico can't support or want? Or, did those two presidents (and others before them) deliberately want to degrade the U.S.?
We should always know everything possible about anyone we allow into this country, and only under dire circumstances should we allow poor, sickly, and criminal people. What does Mexico have over Obama (and Bush '43) to force them to take those Mexico can't support or want? Or, did those two presidents (and others before them) deliberately want to degrade the U.S.?
14
Why does New York Times keep using euphemisms? There's no such a thing as documented immigrant only illegal immigrant.
37
I pay taxes that support our schools even though I don't have a child in school.
I am happy to do this because I believe in public education and the great potential of children to contribute to their communities and our country.
There is no reason to think the children of immigrants will make less of a contribution. In fact, history has shown that first and second generation immigrants, valuing and appreciating the gift of being in America far more than many bored children, make many of the most impressive contributions.
So, as a taxpayer I am outraged that some schools are excluding children who seek an education, wasting the great potential of these young minds.
I am happy to do this because I believe in public education and the great potential of children to contribute to their communities and our country.
There is no reason to think the children of immigrants will make less of a contribution. In fact, history has shown that first and second generation immigrants, valuing and appreciating the gift of being in America far more than many bored children, make many of the most impressive contributions.
So, as a taxpayer I am outraged that some schools are excluding children who seek an education, wasting the great potential of these young minds.
27
My property taxes fund the school district, so it's only reasonable that the district ensures that students live in the district. (Immigration status has nothing to do with residencey).
7
The operative word here is illegal, not immigrant. Try going to any other country and enrolling in public school...or even getting an apartment...without being a legal resident first. I lived in Germany for 4 years as a working musician, and had to have a sponsor...in other words a job lined up...a health check and private health insurace before I could become a resident. My manager had to get my apartment for me while I went through the process, because until I became a legal resident, I was unable to do so myself. There is a big difference between legal and illegal immigrarion. People just are not making this distinction for some reason. I support the legal immigration of skilled workers who can contribute to the system. Try going to Mexico and enrolling your child in public school...or Canada...or anywhere else, without first going through the immigration process legally. It can't be done.
21
How outraged would you be if this same set of facts were presented to you as your school district must cut programs, double class size and divert existing teachers to address this illegal immigrant student population, or to double your school taxes to pay for new facilities and teachers?
It isn't as cut and dried as you make it seem.
It isn't as cut and dried as you make it seem.
17
What will pay the tuition?
16
We the taxpayer. Who else?
6
I don't understand the question. The property taxes pay. Immigrants also live on property that they most likely rent and like other renters, the property tax is included by the landlord in the amount of rent they pay (because why would the landlord eat the cost of the property tax?) .
2
The same people that pay the societal costs of exclusion and discrimination.
Everyone.
It is just silly to point to someone else on this lifeboat and say "them" vs "us".
Everyone.
It is just silly to point to someone else on this lifeboat and say "them" vs "us".
2
This is laughable. School districts are now compelled to enroll illegal aliens. Why would anyone obey the immigrations laws that do exist in this country if ignoring them gets your kids a free education. In fact why does anyone obey any law any more, if the state and federal attorneys general can ignore them, why shouldn't I?
81
School districts are required to obey the law. That seems simple enough. Every child physically in the state is required to attend school. And the school must permit the child to obey the law.
4
This is not new and has been the law of the land for 35 years taking effect during the presidency of Ronald Reagan. The "districts violate a 1982 Supreme Court decision, Plyler v. Doe, which found that schools cannot deny access to public education on the basis of a student’s immigration status." So your question is backwards. The state and federal government is following the law of the land as determined by SCOTUS.
5
Those with their head in the sand, not to mention their heart and compassion, will surely suffocate on their own cold greed and bigotry.
2
The more kids, the more crowded the classrooms. Many of these children do not speak English so need special classes. And one assumes they are behind in what they have been taught. Who is going to pay for all the extra attention, new classrooms, new teachers? Yoo hoo, President Obama, where are you????
62
If you want to assimilate the new immigrants (where did your family immigrate from?) then you need to provide classes, education and acceptance.
Given that this is the richest society ever, cost is not an issue. Distribution of cost is another matter.
Given that this is the richest society ever, cost is not an issue. Distribution of cost is another matter.
3
Various federal programs (Title I, Title VII, Title IX) have been in place for years to provide extra financing for children requiring ESL, bilingual, or special ed. funding to comply with federal mandates. All the districts need to do to get this funding is to apply for it. It's amazing to me how sarcasm ("Yoo hoo, President Obama, where are you????) fills in where knowledge of the facts is absent.
3
We do not want to assimilate citizens of another country who have entered our country illegally. What part of that doesn't get through to the supporters of this movement?
6
Pay to educate people who are breaking the law every day they are here. Insanity. When the history of the end of America is written, who will be able to make sense of this?
45
Great, I will be signing up my children (we live in NYC) to attend Scarsdale public schools, and if they are not allowed due to the fact that we don't reside there, nor pay real estate taxes to Scarsdale, I will accuse them to discriminating against my children.
82
Are you an American citizen? If so, your children are not eligible for this program. Sorry!
10
You got your facts wrong. You still have to prove residency in the school district. But a social security card or visa stamp does not proof residency.
3
Latest estimate from an advocacy group was 300,000 illegal aliens in NYC.
3
The NYS Ed. Dept. and the attorney general's office are not to be praised. They have only succeeded in saddling school districts with yet another unfunded mandate. No matter where you stand on the immigration issue, there are some questions no one should be afraid to ask: Who is going to provide the additional resources for these students? If class sizes exceed reasonable levels or state limits, will additional teachers be hired? Given that these students don't speak English, will additional ESL teachers be hired? And where will these additional students sit? In Hempstead, an already beleaguered district that seems to have been targeted, there simply isn't enough physical space for the students. Who is going to pay for the additional needed buildings? Exactly, and everything other people have said about the inherent unfairness of the situation as all it's done is pit U.S. citizens -- many of whom want to do the right thing -- against immigrants.
64
Donna: What, pray tell, is the "right thing"? Does that include housing them, educating them, allowing them to stay in the United States when they have broken our laughable immigration "laws" to come here? I don't think so. What you are asking about, paying for all of what it means in costs, is for the whole United States to tax itself to pay for the illegal immigrants so you don't have to pay where they have landed. Just doesn't work that way, yet.
IMHO, the "right thing" is to bundle them up in 747's and fly them back to where they came from. Give them plenty of food and clothing. And that's just the illegal kids in NYC. What of the 11-20 million others, depending on who's counting? Yes, I know their homelands are awful. I know they aren't free. I know there is great poverty. We have it right here in the USA for citizens who are also in great poverty. We already have LEGAL immigration in excess of one million every year. Who else does that?
I grind my teeth when we don't enforce our laws. As James said, it makes a mockery of law abiding folks. But, James, I suspect you would not be able to look yourself in the mirror if you did so (ignore the laws and societal agreements). That's good on ya. Don't ever give up your integrity.
When will those people have their own revolution against their oligarchies? For that matter, when will we?? Freedom is never free. And nothing else is, either.
IMHO, the "right thing" is to bundle them up in 747's and fly them back to where they came from. Give them plenty of food and clothing. And that's just the illegal kids in NYC. What of the 11-20 million others, depending on who's counting? Yes, I know their homelands are awful. I know they aren't free. I know there is great poverty. We have it right here in the USA for citizens who are also in great poverty. We already have LEGAL immigration in excess of one million every year. Who else does that?
I grind my teeth when we don't enforce our laws. As James said, it makes a mockery of law abiding folks. But, James, I suspect you would not be able to look yourself in the mirror if you did so (ignore the laws and societal agreements). That's good on ya. Don't ever give up your integrity.
When will those people have their own revolution against their oligarchies? For that matter, when will we?? Freedom is never free. And nothing else is, either.
14
I resent the Supreme Courts cavalier attitude about the rights of illegal aliens. My school districts has investigators checking to be sure the students actually live in the district. They check bus stops to see if the kids are traveling from the city into the suburban district. They also depend on people to report the students illegally using our schools. I am referring to American kids born to American parents. If my district can prevent those children from illegally using our schools, it should be more than obvious that illegal aliens and their children shouldn't be able to abuse the system. I pay school taxes even though I have no children. I shouldn't have to support the education of the illegals and their anchor babies. These people should be deported along with their anchor babies, not granted special privileges. They have no right to steal space from our children.
83
Your logic is flawed. If they live in the district, as either renters or owners, they pay their share of real estate tax. That is the premise of them "paying their fair share" of the school district budget. The enforcement of district lines is different than the enforcement of immigration status.
Incidentally, unless you are Native American, you and your kids are anchor babies too.
So curb the vitriol and think about the unfairness and racist tones of your post.
Incidentally, unless you are Native American, you and your kids are anchor babies too.
So curb the vitriol and think about the unfairness and racist tones of your post.
1
Lily, wrong. First, Native Americans WERE not a nation, they were separate and distinct (mostly) bands of tribes. The English, Dutch, French and Spanish came here, to a newly discovered (for them) land and bargained (unfairly, sure) for the land. At times it was taken, but, today we have a nation and that nation has laws that should not be broken. YOU can become a citizen or otherwise LEGALLY enter this country and enyone not doing so should be deported - PERIOD. No person in the modern age should be able to land on someone else's soil and say take care of me. Sorry, stop crying racism every minute - its not. Its your ploy to "shame" people into seeing things your way or at least to get them to shut up. We gladly open our arms to the millions who come here very year legally, regardless of their race, color, religion or creed. All we ask is that you do so legally and that we not be asked to pay for it - that is not racism.
4
My ancestors purchased the land in New York and New Jersey from the Leni Lenape implying that their residence was acceptable to the natives.
1
This is the natural consequence of irrational federal policy. Local school districts are forced to pay for the education of people who are here illegally. God forbid they attempt to ascertain if they are actually entitled to this (costly) benefit.
68
According to the law (US Supreme Court ruling) they actually ARE entitled to this benefit.
1
several suburban districts had contravened federal guidance by requiring immigrant families to provide proof of district residency before their children were enrolled.
-----------An American mother who enrolled her child in a school in a district she didn't live in committed a felony, but illegal aliens don't have to provide proof of residency? Talk about inequality under the law.
-----------An American mother who enrolled her child in a school in a district she didn't live in committed a felony, but illegal aliens don't have to provide proof of residency? Talk about inequality under the law.
106
This is the point that upsets reasonable people. How is it that illegal immigrants have more latitude than citizens?
I once talked to a cop about the problem of illegal immigrants driving without licenses and/or insurance. The cop gave a shrug and said "They're just trying to get to work so they can feed their families." That is as if I was just out joyriding.
I have a problem with people coming here illegally, having children and then using the children as a reason why they shouldn't be deported. The term "anchor babies" is coarse and inaccurate. But I just don't understand how and why people are allowed to use the system without providing proof of identity.
I once talked to a cop about the problem of illegal immigrants driving without licenses and/or insurance. The cop gave a shrug and said "They're just trying to get to work so they can feed their families." That is as if I was just out joyriding.
I have a problem with people coming here illegally, having children and then using the children as a reason why they shouldn't be deported. The term "anchor babies" is coarse and inaccurate. But I just don't understand how and why people are allowed to use the system without providing proof of identity.
73
The article appears to have slightly misreported the residency requirements. The earlier Times articles in the thread made it clear that people still had to comply with residency requirements, like anyone else, but that some districts were requiring notarized copies of leases - hard to get if a mom doesn't speak English and has never dealt with a notary. New York City, by contrast, requires commonsense proof like ConEd utility bills and spot-checks residency by making in-person visits.
1
There is nothing inaccurate about the term "anchor babies". They are the means by which a woman gets to stay here and receive benefits so she can care for our new American.
5
Understandably districts should not be asking to see visas and social security cards. But to not be able to require proof of residency? That's crazy. As a tax paying resident of my county I expect that my dollars are going to fund the education of in boundary students ONLY. You have to draw a line somewhere, and schools are obligated to verify that they are serving the community they are funded by.
84
There are many ways to show proof of residency -- leases, utility bills, mail -- and neither a social security card nor a visa indicates that a person lives in a particular school district.
13
Why not? People have to show such proof of residence to get a job? Supposedly, that is.
3
Why on Earth should a family living in a suburb, paying over $10,000 in real esta taxes for their small home, be forced to pay for the education of children who do not legally reside in their towns, nor are legally in our nation? Should their real estate taxes go up to pay for this, or should educational programs in those schools be cut in order to pay for the education of these children?
100
Why in earth should we pay for anythimg that we, ourselves don't use? The orevious commenter shows just how far and selfish we have become. If we thiught this way with the wave if European immigrants - or any ither immigrants - none if us would be educated. Do you oay for the FULL cost of the roafs you drive on? Services you use?
11
There's a difference between paying for people who have a right to be here, and paying for anyone who shows up at the door. The latter is to essentially open the purse strings to anyone who chooses to come here for a "free" (to them) education, even if they never had and never will pay a dime in taxes.
48
I wholly understand the sentiment, as a real-estate-tax-paying resident, that we shouldn't want to pay money to educate children "[not] legally in our nation." That being said, there are numerous studies out there (to the point that it should be common knowledge by now), which hail the strong correlation between involved public education and a reduced likelihood of involvement in crime.
Compelling children to go to school is a strong alternative to wasting time away at home, in the streets, or at a job that pays below minimum wage below the table. Let that child grow for 13 years without a public education, or (potentially worse) in a system which consistently treats him/her as an outcast under the constant threat of expulsion or worse (deportation). Obviously a child growing up in that system is significantly less likely to contribute positively to the economy (in terms of income tax, property tax, social security tax, et cetera). However, the true danger is that such a child is, according to the numerous studies I mentioned earlier, exceedingly likely to become involved in crime.
That crime invokes a physical cost against it's victim, a social cost against the society who has lost that criminal's potential contributions to society, and a fiscal cost against the state budge which pays for the public schools that could have prevented this deadly combination. The price to incarcerate a man is around $60k/year. An educated citizen with a fresh perspective? Invaluable.
Compelling children to go to school is a strong alternative to wasting time away at home, in the streets, or at a job that pays below minimum wage below the table. Let that child grow for 13 years without a public education, or (potentially worse) in a system which consistently treats him/her as an outcast under the constant threat of expulsion or worse (deportation). Obviously a child growing up in that system is significantly less likely to contribute positively to the economy (in terms of income tax, property tax, social security tax, et cetera). However, the true danger is that such a child is, according to the numerous studies I mentioned earlier, exceedingly likely to become involved in crime.
That crime invokes a physical cost against it's victim, a social cost against the society who has lost that criminal's potential contributions to society, and a fiscal cost against the state budge which pays for the public schools that could have prevented this deadly combination. The price to incarcerate a man is around $60k/year. An educated citizen with a fresh perspective? Invaluable.
15
Can someone tell me which laws these illegals have to follow and which ones they don't? And tell me again why having the federal government involved in education is a good thing?