Legislators stand on college steps to bar entry
Erroll Davis Jr. is an engineer and businessman by training, having served as CEO of two major utility companies. He now serves on the boards of directors of General Motors and Union Pacific, and as chancellor of the Georgia university system, he has brought a business perspective to academia that frankly, it badly needs.
In a conversation earlier this fall, for example, Davis said the nation’s higher education system operates under “a medieval business model that has changed at the margins, but it has to change dramatically.”
The current delivery system is too capital-intensive and can’t be sustained long-term, he said. University faculty have to become “more productive and more efficient,” and while he says he’s willing to defend tenure, “I will not defend its excesses. Tenure was never designed as a cover for boorish behavior or insubordination.”
In other words, Davis knows the importance of focusing on real problems while ignoring the distractions. And the debate over illegal immigrants in the state university system is clearly a distraction in his eyes.
Those who claim otherwise make three basic claims, Davis explained: Georgia colleges and universities are overrun with illegal immigrants;
those illegal immigrants are costing state taxpayers millions of dollars;
they are also taking slots in top universities that would otherwise go to academically qualified Georgians.
Davis, who later announced his retirement on June 30, 2011, then rattled off the reasons why none of those concerns is valid:
Of the 311,000 students enrolled in the university system, 501 — one-sixth of 1 percent — are undocumented, he said. Of those 501, every single student pays out-of-state tuition.
As university spokesman John Millsaps said this week, the university system actually makes a profit on out-of-state tuition. In other words, the 501 undocumented students do not generate costs for taxpayers and subsidize their counterparts’ education.
Furthermore, of those 501 undocumented students, only 29 attend the five state schools in which applicants must compete for a limited number of slots. (Those five schools are the University of Georgia, Georgia Tech, Georgia College and University, the Medical College of Georgia and Georgia State University. The other 30 schools in the state system are open admission.)
Just two of those 29 undocumented students in competitive-entry schools are taking slots that would otherwise have gone to academically qualified Georgians, Davis said. And as a result of a change in policy, those two will be the last two. No undocumented students will be admitted to schools that do not allow open admission.
Nonetheless, Davis was reminded, state legislators seem intent on making the ban complete, barring the undocumented from enrolling anywhere.
He listened, then paused to measure his words.
“I’m hopeful legislators will spend their time on legislation that will solve problems,” he said.
Did I mention that Davis is also an optimist?
The next legislative session doesn’t begin until January, but state Rep. Tom Rice, R-Norcross, this week pre-filed legislation that would allow Georgia to join South Carolina as the only two states in the country that outright bar undocumented students from attending state colleges. There’s every reason to believe that sometime next spring, Gov. Nathan Deal will be signing such legislation into law.
It’s important to note that other states greatly affected by illegal immigration, including Arizona, balk at such a step. And there’s a reason for that.
It is widely acknowledged across the political spectrum that our borders have to be tightened as much as possible and that hiring practices have to be improved. Illegal immigration is a legitimate problem that needs to be addressed.
But in practical terms, it is also true that most of the eight to 12 million illegal immigrants already in this country are here to stay. There’s no political capital to be reaped at the moment in acknowledging that reality — to the contrary, telling the truth comes at a high cost — but it is reality nonetheless.
The question is whether we keep those people as a perpetual underclass, available to do our dirty work but little else, or whether they will be allowed to contribute their talents and ambitions. Georgia seems intent on taking the first option.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
355 comments Add your comment
Bosch
November 19th, 2010
10:45 am
Matti,
We won’t tell your Engrish teacher, pinky promise.
Bosch
November 19th, 2010
10:45 am
Firsties on 7! I’m on a roll!
Paul
November 19th, 2010
10:47 am
Matti
“While our soldiers are grossing $20-$30K/yr,”
It’s not just what soldiers get paid – it’s the cost of their total compensation to the taxpayers.
It’s kinda like the argument over union wages and car prices. Some here say “they get $N per hour.” Others counter with “yeah, but GM’s paying $H of their health care bill, so the REAL value is $N+H.”
I may still have the study somewhere – been cited here – Rand Corporation (and the Military’s own cost and planning factors regs) say the cost to the taxpayer to keep a person in uniform – pay, allowances, bonus, health care costs, retirement costs – a few years ago was $100,000 a year. So if you cut a regiment from Germany or a wing from Japan and say ‘bye-bye” to all those slots, you’ve saved a significant chunk of change.
Paul
November 19th, 2010
10:49 am
Nice one, Bosch!
But you’re still one behind my record…. HA!
Yikes, just looked at the clock. Back to work -
The Leg Lamp is a "major award".....
November 19th, 2010
10:52 am
Paul
November 19th, 2010
10:42 am
I agree. I worked in the Aerospace industry back in the Reagan years and things were great at that time. But there’s always waste. Remember the $150 toilet seat and expensive hammers? The problem was that, rather than buying standard commerically available products, the govt insisted on specially designed and manufactured products. The $150 toilet seats were not an actual ripoff when considering they were being purchased to upgrade an older aircraft configuration. Try getting Lockheed engineers to design an tool a toilet seat on the cheap for about 50 aircraft. This went on and on. The waste came from the DoD and their specs. My favorite was the coffee machine for an aicraft that ran into the thousands for each unit. Ripoff? Nah, the damn thing was designed to keep perking at 5gs. Hilarious.
Jefferson
November 19th, 2010
10:56 am
How do some of you people feel about waking up each day mad at some group that you feel is somehow getting a better deal than yourself. After a few days, does it change?
emory immigrant student
November 19th, 2010
10:56 am
First of all, Happy Friday! I sit here reading this blog today, and then read your comments and am just amazed. Jay, great blog. All of you individuals who are highly against these undocumented immigrants, two question, where did you go to school? Or did you go to school?
If you yourselves go back and read what you say you will see the ignorance of your comments. If you went to school you might have learn of everything that happened in the 1960’s and civil rights. Some of you might have lived during that time, and that might be the problem, you were racist then, you are racist now.60 years won’t change your mindset.
What’s going on is clearly what has happened in the past just with a new ethnicity, Hispanics. Although undocumented immigrants consist from all over the world, you pick on Hispanics to make yourselves feel good.
As an emory scholar and immigrant student, I feel sad that our country has, and this state is lead by, such ignorant people. This is why this country does not progress, because you don’t let it. But hey, if blaming immigrants makes you feel better, and not allowing them to go to school even if they are more qualified than others, go for it. Anything to make you feel better.
stands for decibels
November 19th, 2010
10:57 am
Your 10:19 – you like posting stuff that makes lalaland libs’ heads explode, don’t you?
um, Paul, Leggy?
Best as I can tell from the last wiki page on NPR, their total annual revenue comes to 159 million. of that about 16 percent, total, comes from government derived grants.
So being VERY generous to our Leg Lamp, you might argue that about $25 million per year winds up going there. That comes to about twelve cents per American.
But hey, if you want to “cut” that to 200 million, go for it.
Mick
November 19th, 2010
10:58 am
leg
**The waste came from the DoD and their specs**
I hope we won’t get fooled again.
Matti
November 19th, 2010
10:58 am
Paul, good point.
That reminds me how the numbers get lost when you look at the cost to educate a child in public school for one year vs. the cost to incarcertate a citizen for one year. Our state legislators, when they’re not busy guarding the university doors from half a dozen bright students whose parents broke the law, are eager to slash funding for education year after year. But then, with the increasing privitization of prisons (and friends willing to take those contracts), expect to see more and more funds appropriated for that purpose. Did you know we incarcerate a higher percentage of our population than any other state?
Re: Our soldiers in Germany… bring them home and their girlfriends will be sorely disappointed. (OMG Heidelberg is SO romantic!) But instead of issuing pink slips, I think we need to bring our soldiers back here so they can defend our borders — a common job description for soldiers throughout history.
stands for decibels
November 19th, 2010
10:59 am
sorry, should’ve written “you might argue that about $25 million from taxpayers per year winds up going there”, @ 10.57.
Southern Comfort
November 19th, 2010
11:01 am
Get your best party gear ready, this weekend is the Full Beaver Moon.
Paul
November 19th, 2010
11:02 am
sfd
I was referring to Leg Lamp’s take on Defense cuts.
And when he referenced the $400 million plus, I surmised he was speaking not of NPR’s federal funding, but the parent organization, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.
Paulo977
November 19th, 2010
11:06 am
Folks … Man has traveled from day one… our ancestors invaded lands that they said needed “civilizing” ,LOL check the hidden agenda, then later on ancestors’ children took on the job of “protecting” foreign nations’ inhabitants they felt needed to be liberated from their own dictators,LOL!
Of course some dictators were deemed beneficial, according to some impenetrable logic, so THEY were supported e.g. Pinochet , Seaga of Jamaica , to name a few. We now have military bases around the world and ‘uncountabl’ Americans living in luxury there . How dare we discuss the business of legal , illegal, amnesty etc etc etcof human beings who work hard to contribute to our well being …. HYPOCRITES!!!
stands for decibels
November 19th, 2010
11:13 am
I was referring to Leg Lamp’s take on Defense cuts.
ok.
And when he referenced the $400 million plus, I surmised he was speaking not of NPR’s federal funding, but the parent organization, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.
CPB’s total is actually 422 million, so maybe that’s a fair surmisin’.
(I think it’d be foolish to cut that in half, and a lot of people for whom their only link to civilization is their PBS or NPR affiliate, supported by the CPB–many in flyover, republican-voting country, btw–would be PO’d beyond belief.)
Southern Comfort
November 19th, 2010
11:14 am
My favorite was the coffee machine for an aicraft that ran into the thousands for each unit. Ripoff? Nah, the damn thing was designed to keep perking at 5gs. Hilarious.
Where can I get one of those?!!?
Doggone/GA
November 19th, 2010
11:17 am
“a lot of people for whom their only link to civilization is their PBS or NPR affiliate, supported by the CPB–many in flyover, republican-voting country, btw–would be PO’d beyond belief.)”
Yes…but…wouldn’t a “conservative” say that if they want that service they should pay for it by contributing directly, and not “forcing” the rest of us to pay too? They would, wouldn’t they?
And actually, I think if the funding IS cut – that’s exactly what will heppen. It did before, when NPR got something like 40% of it’s budget either directly or indirectly from the government.
Harry Callahan
November 19th, 2010
11:18 am
Question for the liberals…I think that if illegal aliens are going to be allowed into our taxpayer-funded colleges and universities, they should also be allowed to join unions and take union jobs. Agreed?
TaxPayer
November 19th, 2010
11:22 am
Ooh! Ooh! I know. I know. And if illegal immigrants can attend our taxpayer-funded colleges, they should be allowed to become president too. That’ll teach ‘em.
Southern Comfort
November 19th, 2010
11:26 am
they should also be allowed to join unions and take union jobs.they should also be allowed to join unions and take union jobs.
Wouldn’t that require them to be employed? Wouldn’t that lead to employers breaking the law? I thought conservatives were all about “law and order”…
stands for decibels
November 19th, 2010
11:26 am
Filed under “stuff I figured was probably the case but didn’t necessarily want to know…”
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1110/45400.html
Fewer than half of all Americans know that Republicans will have a majority in the House next year, but not the Senate, according to a new poll.
Only 46 percent of respondents in a Pew Research poll released Thursday knew that the GOP had taken over only the House, while a mere 38 percent can identify Ohio Republican John Boehner as the incoming speaker. Three times as many young people, aged under 30, could properly identify Google’s new phone software, Android, as could identify Boehner.
Additionally, 27 percent of Americans do not know if the Republicans won either chamber of Congress while five percent believe the Democrats kept both chambers. Fourteen percent said the Republicans won both chambers.
Matti
November 19th, 2010
11:29 am
Harry Calllahan,
Instead of asking “liberals,” why don’t you ask union members? Not all “liberals” belong to unions, and therefore would not presume to speak for those who do.
jm
November 19th, 2010
11:31 am
sfd – “Three times as many young people, aged under 30, could properly identify Google’s new phone software, Android, as could identify Boehner.”
Exhibit A why Obama was elected primarily by dumb, politically unaware people (the college turnout was big). Yeah, I voted for him too. But at least I knew why….
Harry Callahan
November 19th, 2010
11:33 am
Matti…but all union members are liberals
Jay
November 19th, 2010
11:34 am
Harry, I’m sure a lot of illegals already ARE members of the service employees union. So what’s your point?
Harry Callahan
November 19th, 2010
11:34 am
Southern Comfort
November 19th, 2010
11:26 am
“Wouldn’t that require them to be employed? Wouldn’t that lead to employers breaking the law? I thought conservatives were all about “law and order”…”
One of the biggest lies currently being told is that conservatives want illegals to have jobs so they can exploit the cheap labor, but I know truth and fact aren’t really important to folks like you, AmVet, and Bookman, so keep on rocking…
Fred
November 19th, 2010
11:35 am
emory immigrant student: It is sad that an Emory student blessed with the benefits of higher education, perhaps even advanced degrees can be so butt stupid.
Obviously you AREN’T an illegal alien or you wouldn’t be at Emory. Sadly although I know the professors tried, you failed to learn how to think or comprehend the written word. The civil right movement had nothing to do with criminals who illegally entered this Country. Further more, you write:
“As an emory scholar and immigrant student, I feel sad that our country has…..such ignorant people.”
Well I don’t know what country you are from so I would hesitate to make a blanket comment on the ignorance of your fellow citizens. Perhaps you meant to say THIS Country, IE the US. If that is the case, then why don’t you go back to your country? Why are you here? You are a GUEST in our Country enjoying the hospitality we provide and an education from one of the top Universities in the world.
The argument at hand is not about “immigrants,” it’s about ILLEGAL immigrants in State supported schools. It is an issue to be decided by CITIZENS of THIS State and THIS Country. People who pay taxes and have a stake in THIS Country, not by some insipid over pampered rich kid from another country. You are like a drunken lout at a party. You were invited in hopes that you would enliven the ambiance. Instead you get drunk, pee on the couch, crap in the punch bowl while breaking the table lamps and THEN tell the home owners that they stupid.
Just damn……….
Gandalph, the Fun
November 19th, 2010
11:36 am
POTTER OPENED TODAY! I HEAR HARRY BITES IT!~
Jay
November 19th, 2010
11:37 am
And jm, if you’d asked the over 65 crowd, three times as many could identify Ava Gardner as could identify Boehner.
Just guessing of course. But I’d put money on it.
Gandalph, the Fun
November 19th, 2010
11:38 am
Illegal immigrant is equivelent to the N word
chuck
November 19th, 2010
11:38 am
Emory Immigrant student. If you are here LEGALLY, we don’t have a problem with that, but don’t ask me SUBSIDIZE your education OR that of illegals. Also, don’t think about staying here AFTER you get that great Emory education. Take it back and make YOUR country better.
Gandalph, the Fun
November 19th, 2010
11:38 am
that n word being naughty
Harry Callahan
November 19th, 2010
11:38 am
Jay
November 19th, 2010
11:34 am
“Harry, I’m sure a lot of illegals already ARE members of the service employees union. So what’s your point?”
My point is that a majority of both registered Democrats and Republicans oppose amnesty for illegals, oppose illegals in our schools, oppose illegals taking jobs from Americans, and oppose business that employ illegals. But the mindless liberal talking heads like to portray conservatives as shameless hypocrites, hence the all the sham stories about conservative being in favor of corporations hiring illegals., etc…
Fred
November 19th, 2010
11:39 am
Harry: I know over 30 illegals who are members of the Local Carpenters Union right here in Atlanta. They even have “valid” SSN’s. They pay union dues, taxes and fund pension plans they will never be able to collect on. What is your point?
Gandalph, the Fun
November 19th, 2010
11:40 am
send them home!
Harry Callahan
November 19th, 2010
11:41 am
Fred
November 19th, 2010
11:39 am
“Harry: I know over 30 illegals who are members of the Local Carpenters Union right here in Atlanta. They even have “valid” SSN’s. They pay union dues, taxes and fund pension plans they will never be able to collect on. What is your point?”
My point is that I bet the unions that pour millions of dollars into Democrat campaign coffers are opposed to it. That help?
jm
November 19th, 2010
11:47 am
Jay 11:37 – probably true. “if you’d asked the over 65 crowd, three times as many could identify Ava Gardner as could identify Boehner”
Also a Democrat demographic. True, but just kidding.
I’m sure more R’s are watching Dancing with the Stars than C-span 100% of the time DWTS is on.
Southern Comfort
November 19th, 2010
11:49 am
One of the biggest lies currently being told is that conservatives want illegals to have jobs so they can exploit the cheap labor, but I know truth and fact aren’t really important to folks like you, AmVet, and Bookman, so keep on rocking…
Damn dude, can you read for comprehension. My point was that for illegals to join unions and take union jobs they would have to be employed, right? For them to be employed, someone would have to hire them, right? Once hired, would that employer not be breaking the law? For you to advocate something such as that, to me, is assinine if you’re as conservative as you pretend to be. As I said, I thought conservatives were all about law and order. What you’re suggesting is as much of a violation of law as them being here illegally is. Who’s side are you on.
It’s obvious truth and fact don’t matter much to you either as you seem to twist and stretch them as many of your conservative pundits do.
ATF
November 19th, 2010
12:09 pm
I most vigorously believe we need to close the border, patrol the border, and send back any more who cross it. And, we need to be willing to pay the taxes to see that it is done. We need harsh legislation that jails and fines employers of illegal aliens. We need legislation that sets up a system for farm workers so we can have food on our tables.
We can end birthright citizenship but we have all those who were born here since that last amnesty, 1986, who are citizens. You can’t change the law and make it retroactive. So, we still have to deal with all those who are born here until the law changes.
But we do have thousands (maybe millions) of illegals who have actually lived here, worked here, and paid taxes. Some of them have health insurance through their employers, some have bought health insurance on the private market. Some served in our armed forces or are married to or are the parents of those who have served or are serving. Some own small businesses. In other words, some are net contributors to our society. They are all we want any other citizen to be – except they came here illegally.
Dubya Bush proposed an amnesty and was ignored. Obama proposed an amnesty and was ignored. Meanwhile we get an unclosed border, stupid legislation that does not address the depth or complexity of the problem, and stalemate.
The question is, do you want a solution or do you just want your way? Even if the Republicans and/or all the Tea Partiers get elected and hold the U.S. House, Senate, and Presidency, they will have to deal with the complexities rather than just bow to the “kick the bums out” mentality that is so prominent.
What do you say? Could we at least let the wife of a service man stay? and, maybe, the children? what about the parents who raised him to be willing to sacrifice his life for the country he claimed? What about the family that has been here for ten years, paid taxes, bought a home, hasn’t been in trouble with the law?
Ed
November 19th, 2010
12:13 pm
It is against FEDERAL Law to allow any individual that is here ILLEGALLY to receive the benefit of Higher Education. Also, it lists specific benefits that they are NOT able to receive.
READ THE LAW…it’s in plain black and white:
The Federal law defines public benefits in 8 U.S.C. Section 1611, 1621, or 1623 as follows:
1621 defines State or local public benefit:
(c) “State or local public benefit” defined
(1) Except as provided in paragraphs (2) and (3), for purposes of this subchapter the term “State or local public benefit” means—
(A) any grant, contract, loan, professional license, or commercial license provided by an agency of a State or local government or by appropriated funds of a State or local government; and
(B) any retirement, welfare, health, disability, public or assisted housing, postsecondary education, food assistance, unemployment benefit, or any other similar benefit for which payments or assistance are provided to an individual, household, or family eligibility unit by an agency of a State or local government or by appropriated funds of a State or local government.
md
November 19th, 2010
12:22 pm
“It is against FEDERAL Law to allow any individual that is here ILLEGALLY to receive the benefit of Higher Education.”
Well, it is also against Federal law for them to be here in the first place……………laws are for those that wish to follow them…………the rest are s-p-e-c-i-a-l-…………….
Common Sense isn't very Common
November 19th, 2010
12:28 pm
chuck@10:13 am
I think they (illegal employer’s) should be PROSECUTED and the fines should be so HIGH that there would be NO BENEFIT to hiring illegals. That would essentially empty our country of the 12 million illegals.
———————————————————-
Let’s go for a 2fer. Fine the employers and use part of that fine to hold and deport their workers. Better than them finding another illegal employer or walking home.
Southern Comfort
November 19th, 2010
12:29 pm
Ed
To play devil’s advocate, if they are paying for their own postsecondary education, how would that be in violation of the law? The law states:
(B) any retirement, welfare, health, disability, public or assisted housing, postsecondary education, food assistance, unemployment benefit, or any other similar benefit for which payments or assistance are provided to an individual, household, or family eligibility unit by an agency of a State or local government or by appropriated funds of a State or local government.
If they’re paying for it out of pocket, they are not receiving payments and/or assistance.
chuck
November 19th, 2010
12:30 pm
ATF, I would say that MY WAY is the solution.
chuck
November 19th, 2010
12:34 pm
Good Idea Common Sense. SoCo, their education IS being paid for by the State. Have you seen the budget for higher ed. It is significantly HIGHER than what tuition covers. In otherwords ALL college students in state universities and colleges are being subsidized. Doing that for American students is LEGAL, for illegals it is NOT.
chuck
November 19th, 2010
12:35 pm
Of course, if you get right down to it, the state isn’t really subsidizing their education. What we are ACTUALLY subsidizing is an extremely bloated educational Bureaucracy.
Fred
November 19th, 2010
12:37 pm
Hey Jay,
If you are still monitoring the blog, i think I have a great Friday going home jam for you that fits this topic……..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mUW1SGF7bR8
Southern Comfort
November 19th, 2010
12:39 pm
chuck
Are the schools subsidized per student, or are they going to receive the same amount of money each year in the budget? I know tuition does not cover all of school costs. However, if the school receives money per student, then there’s no legal way out. If you can not pinpoint it, legally, it’s a loophole that can be exploited. I’m not saying I agree with it, but from what I do for a living, I’ve found out that unless wording is very specific, it can be twisted in a court of law.
Ed
November 19th, 2010
12:47 pm
Southern Comfort,
“postsecondary education” in and of itself and having access to it is defined as a benefit….regardless of who is paying for it. It is in Federal law and two Georgia laws support those Federal statutes (SB 529 from 2006 and HB 2 from 2009).
Southern Comfort
November 19th, 2010
12:58 pm
Ed
Read my response to chuck. I’m just playing devil’s advocate. I’ve seen laws get twisted if things are not worded explicitly.
Bring back "Babe Alley" to the Georgia Capitol!
November 19th, 2010
1:06 pm
State legislators are not reacting to the illegal immigration issue on their own whims because, trust me, there’s no way that they would willingly or proactively get in the way of their corporate lobbyist handlers making money hand over fist. Believe it or not, state legislators are reacting to this issue because of the outrage displayed by their constituents that was sparked by the Jessica Coloti debacle at Kennesaw State University. Doesn’t matter if the issue of barring illegal immigrants from taxpayer-funded public colleges and universities seems to be a distraction because a very loud and vocal majority of Georgians don’t like the idea of even one undocumented illegal alien taking spots and sapping limited educational resources from the state’s legal residents and legal immigrants. To most Georgians, 501 out of 311,000 students, or 1/6 of 1% is way too many, in addition, with the recent crush of illegal immigrants migrating to Georgia in the past 15 years, many Georgians are frightened that without restrictions on illegals at state institutions, those institutions could in the not-too-distant-future possibly be overrun by increasing numbers of illegals taking spots from academically-qualified legal residents at universities and local community colleges alike.
Steve
November 19th, 2010
1:09 pm
Jay,
Birthright citizenship was an amendment (#14) that was added to the Constitution. It can be repealed or amended just as the amendment to make alchohol illegal was.
BADA BING
November 19th, 2010
1:13 pm
You know that if the immigrants get educated and successful, like the Cuban population, the democrats will lose them as voters?
Common Sense isn't very Common
November 19th, 2010
1:26 pm
Being 2nd generation Irish (legal immigration) I am offended that blanket amnesty was given during Ronald Reagans terms in office.
That has changed a lot of peoples opinion from throw them out to welllllllll if Ronald Reagan said it was ok then lets declare them ALL legal.
And the who will pick or vegetables arguement is not valid as work visa for migrant have been issued for many years (with the expectation that the workers returned home).
Many are homeowners, small business owners etc.. Put them at the head of the list for citizenship as they are aiding our economy.
The other workers have overstayed their welcome in many peoples eyes.
AND they ALL do not pay taxes (just like all US citizens don’t pay theirs).
On the issue of the current college students, let them finish their degree programs (in a reasonable time frame) and offer them the choice of citizenship (and repayment for education) or deportation.
JD
November 20th, 2010
8:07 am
Not all of the undocumented students are immigrants. Undocumented includes those whose paperwork for renewing a student visa has not been processed in a timely manner by our US State department. The majority of these cases are students from countries such as Canada, England, Germany, Georgia (the country not the state), etc. So — we have students, not living off the taxpayer’s dime, who are left undocumented because we have failed to process their paperwork, who have no intention to immigrate — that’s far from the vision of a wetback who attends one of our schools without paying any money. Facts really mess up simple thinking.