RI Education Board Undocumented immigrant policy stirs controversy

Illegal immigration is a hot topic, one I don't feel like I know enough about to get close enough within the 10 foot pole rule to say anything about.  But then this week, my English professor at JWU, Professor Janice Taraborelli, gave us an assignment to choose an "issue of the day" to write about.  Since I am attempting to connect all of my coursework for all of my classes to my career in Institutional Research, suddenly I find myself with an issue to write about staring me in the face.  This week, the Rhode Island Education Board voted on a policy change to allow undocumented immigrants (otherwise termed "illegal aliens") who have gone to a Rhode Island high school for at least three years to pay in-state (rather than out-of-state) tuition at any state college or university.

The controversy crosses both sides of the political divide.  There are hard-core conservatives for this measure and left leaning liberals against, contrary to what one might initially speculate.  There is a lot of misinformation floating around out there, and anger about how this policy was adopted outside of legislation, which, opponents claim, is illegal policy change due to the fact that state schools are subsidized by taxpayers.  Governor Lincoln Chafee, a supporter of this policy change, claims that the measure will help undocumented citizens have access to education.  The policy does not come without conditions; to qualify, students must have gone to high school in Rhode Island for at least three years, be accepted by the institution, and initiate the process of citizenship when they become eligible.  Also, these students would not be qualified to receive federal or state financial aid.  Proponents claim that this will help the state as it will encourage more people to come to college here, thus our tuition revenues will increase.  Opponents claim that for every illegal citizen who goes to one of Rhode Island's public institutions at a reduced cost takes the place of a legal citizen, who, if from out of state, would have had to pay more, thereby nullifying the claim that there would be additional tuition revenue.

I have a lot of research to do on this subject before I can write my argumentative essay.  I am not even sure what my thesis statement will be.  However, it will be interesting to me as a researcher what the results of this policy change may be.  Will future bond issues be impacted by this, when angry voters vote no on school improvements? To be sure, there is plenty of anger surrounding this issue.