29 Mar 2004 What Did the Protesters at Rove’s House Want, Anyway?
Since folks do seem to be willing to send me e-mail, I wonder if someone out there can fill me in on something.
Specificially, is this Washington Post story so biased it is incomprehensible (from a policy standpoint), or am I the only one who doesn’t get it?
Here’s the gist. Protesters went to Karl Rove’s house and banged on his doors and windows, scaring his child and a neighbor child. The protesters were seeking Rove’s support for legislation that would let “immigrants who have lived in the United States for at least five years to apply for legal resident status once they graduate from high school.”
According to the article, the demonstrators want to attend state-subsidized colleges and universities at the in-state rate, yet they don’t qualify as state residents since they aren’t legal residents of the U.S.
So, possibly, this is a story about a bunch of foreign nationals illegally residing in the U.S. pounding on Rove’s house demanding that our taxpayers help them pay for college.
But is this accurate?
Or could it be that the minor children of foreign nationals who are living here legally are considered “undocumented” (as they presumably were minors when their parents obtained residency permits), so when they finish high school they are uneligble to attend their local state schools at in-state rates?
I’ve read the Post story several times, and I just can’t tell. I suspect the former is true, but the Post couldn’t bring itself to use the term “illegal alien,” preferring such terms as “undocumented student immigrant.” But I am only guessing.