Newsroom: (541) 346-5511
Suite 300, Erb Memorial Union
P.O. Box 3159, Eugene, OR 97403
E-mail: editor@dailyemerald.com
Online: www.dailyemerald.com
Thursday, July 22, 2004
Oregon Daily Emerald
COMMENTARY
Editor in Chief:
Jared Paben
Managing Editor:
Travis Willse
You have no passport^
no visa, no papers
and you haven’t
In. paid your taxes!
Sorry, Sam,
I’ve got a full-ride
scholarship.
Higher
Education
Est. 1786
S.R. Neuman Freelance Illustrator
Bureaucracy and
o o no
I bought a shirt in San Francisco last
. March that reads, "Don't mess with
Kansas, either." Now it seems there might
be some truth to that statement after all.
Kris Kobach, a lawyer-turned-Congres
sional-candidate in Kansas, filed a lawsuit
aimed at overturning a Kansas law that
allows illegal immigrants to be eligible
for in-state tuition. The lawsuit was filed
Monday on behalf of some Kansas non
resident students who view the law as un
fair to them.
Now, I'm sure all my conservative read
ers who imagine me a left-winger will be
expecting me to disagree with this auda
ciously political maneuver; however, I'm
sctry to disappoint. 1 agree that giving il
legal immigrants in-state tuition — and
• h xs cheating thousands of legitimate
non-resident students who also want an
education — is a fundamentally bad idea
i m several levels.
Supporters of such a law claim that it
encourages illegal immigrants to go back
to school so that they might eventually
join the ranks of working Americans and
add to the country's great labor pool. But,
if illegal immigrants really want to become
a legitimate part of said labor pool, here's a
better idea: Send them back and let them
come over legally (for example, gain citi
zenship), require them to meet the stan
dard requirements for becoming a state
resident, just like everybody else, and then
give them in-state tuition — legally.
Sounds harsh, right? Well, why not? No
matter what form of whining sodally-con
scious supporters of this law can muster,
J. TOBIAS MONTRY
STOP BREEDING
one fundamental fact stands as a forebod
ing obstacle to their grumbling: No student
should be granted special privileges not
given to any other student, especially if that
student is breaking immigration laws.
This isn't about race or the misguided
neoliberal idea that all outsiders are un
welcome within the boundaries of our
nation (admit it, you're rolling your eyes
right now and writing me off as an ex
tremist who hates diversity). But in reality
this argument is solely about accounta
bility in the eyes of the law for all people
in America, be it rights granted in our
Constitution or laws governing tuition.
Yet, 1 will inevitably receive a certain
tonnage of hate mail from those who feel
any opinion perceived to adversely affect
a minority group is racist on its face, and
any writer pushing such an opinion is a
hopelessly uninformed American who
hasn't been past the borders that delicate
ly hold this place together.
Well, I've been around the world. I've ex
plored Europe and Asia extensively, and I
have a diverse family. Still, if my sister, who
is half-Japanese; came to America illegally, I
wouldn't change my opinion. And if 1 went
to Japan illegally, I wouldn't expect special
treatment. I would expect to be treated like
somebody who entered the country illegal
ly and was attempting to exploit its laws for
my financial gain.
Such is the most important point of
this debate: special treatment. Who de
serves it? The people who work hard? The
people who don't follow the law of the
land? Nobody? That depends on your
political persuasion, but suffice it to say
that when it comes to college tuition, all
students should be treated fairly and eq
uitably — not just the ones who can tug
the heart-strings of bleeding-heart, eco
nomically ignorant bureaucrats.
On a side note, did you know that the
United States Student Association — a
lobbying group funded in part with stu
dent fees, including moneys from the Uni
versity — has advocated for similar tuition
laws? Congratulations, University student!
You officially and most likely unknowing
ly support this immigration policy by
proxy. How does it feel? If you disagree,
the moral of the story is this: When the
next Programs Finance Committee
process rolls around, don't forget to fight
for your money so vehemently that the
ASUO won't know what hit it. Taking the
power of handling YOUR money away
from money-grubbing, infighting and in
evitably corrupt students is a great start.
Godspeed, all ye oppressed souls.
janmontry@dailyemerald.com
State legislature,
not University,
finalizes budget,
deserves blame
GUEST
COMMENTARY
Elected bodies, such as the legislative committees that
deal with the OUS budget, have the power to issue budget
notes. Budget notes for the OUS in the past have directed
the agency to do as the legislature sees fit with tuition; they
do this every biennia that I can remember. Tuition is debated
in the legislature every session. Budget notes do not carry the
power of the law but do have a direct and significant impact
on decisions arrived at by, in this case, the OUS board with
recommendation from the University presidents and the
chancellor on the issue of tuition. It is misleading to create
_ a cartoon (ODE, May 25) de
picting that people in Johnson
Hall enjoy raising tuition or
that they exercise the final
authority over tuition and
ultimately should be held
responsible. Raising tuition sucks, but universities around the
country are facing similar difficulties, however severe
it may be here in Oregon.
Furthermore, nobody in the administration at any
OUS school really likes raising tuition; they are often forced
to. Having served on the OUS board 1 know full well that even
at that level it was apparent that the power over tuition really
resides with the legislature and the governor. The OUS
board is the legal authority over tuition but the legislature has
the final say, and they always get what they want. Moreover, pri
vate donors and the federal government can only do so much;
the state doesn't pay its fair share of the burden and students
are left with the bill. That is why we are put upon
financially; it's not Dave Frohnmayer's fault. In fact, President
Frohnmayer is one of the best public figures we could ask for to
carry our cause.
Most importantly, if real change is to occur in the way
Oregon pays for our public universities, it will have to be
on the ballot. The governor is proposing a Constitutional
amendment to create an endowment that would generate
revenue outside of regular, general fund appropriations from
the legislature towards entitlement scholarships for Oregon
high school graduates. The Access Scholarships for Educational
Trust will take a lot of work to make a reality but it is desper
ately needed in Oregon. Focusing our grievances as students
at real targets for change is much better than blaming bureau
crats that can't even fight back. Seriously, based on ethical
and legal principles you are not going to ever hear public em
ployees from Johnson Hall fight back on stuff like this. They
are precluded from such political activities and the result is that
people go on thinking that they are the bad guys when if you
look at it more closely, turns out every one of voting age in Ore
gon will be the bad guy if we don't vote for something like
what the governor is proposing with ASET. This problem is
much bigger than Johnson Hall.
Economically, higher education is the future of this
country. Maybe it always has been, but no more so than
today. Oregon doesn't like raising taxes but maybe Oregonians
will see fit to plan for our future and raise taxes in some way to
help out students striving for a good education so that
eventually, our tax base may grow and more of our
citizens can prosper and take advantage of a world knowledge
based economy.
Tim Young, a graduate student studying public policy
and management, served on tHe OUS board and as
student body president of Portland State University.
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Emerald article errs
in issue of2005-07tuition
I appreciated the article on the
State Board of Higher Education
budget proposal in the July 20
Emerald ("Higher Ed board
proposes 2005-07 budget"). While
the article generally did a good job
of capturing the recommendations
the Board will make to Governor
Kulongoski for his 2005-07
budget, it did not correctly describe
the proposal for tuition for the
coming biennium.
In fact, the Board's recommendation
in its Essential Budget Level proposal is
for a 5 percent tuition increase in each
year of the biennium — absolutely the
minimum amount necessary to con
tinue our educational programs at this
year's level. In response to board mem
ber Tim Nesbitt's suggestion, the Board
also requested, as an addition to this
Essential Budget Level, a policy pack
age of $20 million, in order to reduce
the projected tuition increase to
the 3.6 percent quoted in the
Emerald article.
Whether or not the governor
will recommend, or the Legislature
will fund, this additional policy
package is of course not known
at this time. In fact, the final tuition
levels for 2005-07 will not be deter
mined and approved by the Board
until early summer 2005. The
important point here is that the
Board and the OUS institutions
are concerned about the level of tu
ition and the recent increases neces
sary to make up for the disinvest
ment of state general funds, and
are committed to holding these in
creases to the minimum necessary
to continue educational programs
and course availability at this
year's level.
John Moseley
senior vice president and provost
Student should take
blame for assignment
Regarding "Journalism school
shows bad judgment with work
shop" (ODE, June 2): The student
decided not to do the assignment
correctly; they just did the letter of
the assignment, and made a choice
to break the law.
If a student plagiarizes a work, is
it the fault of the teacher for asking
them to write? No, it is the fault of
the student for making a choice to
copy the work. Blame the person
who made the negligent choice.
Don't blame the teacher for trying to
challenge a student.
David Hogan
San Diego
. -