Greg Brophy position on in-state tuition for illegal aliens

[Singlestack]

I was at the Tanner today, and saw that the Tancredo and Brophy campaigns both had tables. In fact Greg Brophy himself was present, but was occupied speaking with others and I didn't have time to wait. I asked the volunteer at Brophy's table about the Tancredo campaign's allegation that Brophy supports in-state tuition for illegal immigrants. The Volunteer gave me a copy of a recent email from his campaign to others. Rather than risking improper paraphrasing or leaving content and context out, here is the entire text of the Brophy campaign's response (it appears to be Mr Brophy himself since it says "Greg B" at the end):
******************************************

I'll paste below what I wrote about why I voted for in-state tuition (ASSET). Note that we do give in-state tuition to military and to executives who have been recruited to work here (or their kids as it were). Also, to the people who say why can't a Kansan get in-state tuition here? It's because they get in-state tuition in Kansas, the state in which they live.

ASSET
Two things have happened to make me re-examine my long held position against in-state tuition for illegal alien children.

One is a gradual change, over the past ten years representing Eastern Colorado, I've had the opportunity to meet a lot of great kids, some of whom would benefit from the passage of this bill. I don't ask them, but occasionally their teachers tell me. Combined with the experience of living in the best town on the Plains, it's hard to ignore the proverbial elephant in the room. There are lots of young 'people who were born in another country sitting beside kids who were born in Eastern Colorado.

The other was more sudden. A quick dawning of a realization forced by statements made during the GOP Presidential Primary about illegal aliens just going home or self deporting. I have fallen for that siren song before, but knowing the kids that live in my area, I was struck: this is their home. They cant go home. They are home; looking at the kids in any classroom in Eastern Colorado, you can't tell who is an American and who isan illegal alien. They all look the same; they are the same. They are Kit carson Wildcats, Burlington Cougars, Holyoke Dragons, Wray Eagles or Yuma Indians (the Indians aren't much good at football, but Yuma Indians they are, 43-0)
They'd be as much at home in Chihuahua as my kids would.

These kids are fully assimilated into our culture. They play Wii and Xbox. They play football, basketball, baseball and they participate in the sport of the Gods, wrestling. Unfortunately they still play the sport of European socialists too, but no one is perfect.

These are emotionally based reasons for re-examining a position I have held for a decade. If I voted solely based on emotion, I could easily swap my position, basically, act like a Democrat.

But I need more than mere emotion to drive a vote, after all, there are moral and principled arguments against granting this benefit to kids who came here illegally. I'll let others make that case.

Are there moral and principled arguments for the proposal?

If you accept the notion that they are not leaving, then the answer is yes, definitely. If you still hold tightly to the idea of self deportation, well, maybe then too.

Families with modest incomes that have been here for years, whether they have come from Michigan or Mexico, are effectively net tax recipients. A family of four or five making median household income on the Plains pays no income tax. Period. It doesn't matter if they are here legally or not. They all pay sales taxes, property taxes etc., though. They are all paying into the system and that is all that is required, that and liVing here for at least a year to get in-state tuition for college.

If one cares to break out of the earning group that doesn't pay taxes and become a net tax payer, one who pays more in taxes than receives in benefits. The best way is through education. Go to college. Maximize that human-capital; pursue happiness.

I believe that's the stage two thinking principle that matters. Our Founders wrote that we have certain inalienable rights, one of those is the pursuit of happiness. The ability to own the fruits of your labor; in most cases, those fruits are greater if you are college educated. State policy currently denies some kids who have lived here for years access to higher education at the same rates as the rest of their classmates. We can change that. If you accept the reality, they are not going to self deport, you ought
to remove a barrier to their natural right to pursue happiness.

In the state legislature, we can't solve a broken immigration system that denies people the opportunity to pursue the American dream, but we can defy those federal authorities when their policies are contrary to the foundational tenants of our Republic. I'm willing to do that on Second Amendment grounds, why not be willing to do in on pursuit of happiness grounds too?

We give in-state tuition to kids of executives recruited to work in Colorado. We give in-zest ate tuition to military families that have just come to Colorado. ASSET gives in-state tuition to kids who have lived here at least three years, and in most cases nearly their entire lives.

Greg B.

[Singlestack]

So here is my take on Mr Brophy's position on illegal aliens getting in-state tuition:

In short, I believe I'm at odds with him. I sort of understand his position, given that a significant number of illegal alien families live in his district. However, although they live in his district, they aren't a voting constituency and therefore he is under no direct political pressure to meet their demands.

He seems to not believe in self-deportation, but from acccounts I have read I do believe that does happen - most illegal aliens migrate to where the jobs are. He states "they can't go home". Well, they got here somehow, so why can't they go back? Of course they can. He also states you can't tell who is an American and who is an illegal alien. From many accounts I have read, many if not most illegal aliens from Mexico or latin America speak Spanish only and are not assimilated into American culture - and have no desire to. Many have extended family in other countries and send the bulk of their income back to the home country rather than spend it here.

He states the illegal alien kids are fully assimilated into American culture. I really don't know if that is true, or not - but I don't believe that just because they may play videogames means they are assimilated at all. Also, what about their parents - are they assimilated into American culture? I doubt it.

I find it a bit scary that Mr Brophy admits to taking an emotional position on illegal immigration. It would seem that he could just as easily "evolve" to a more emotionally-based position on the 2nd Amendment, state tyranny, or any number of other important issues where raw emotion fights against facts.

I'm also a bit bothered by My Brophy's position regarding pursuit of happiness as an inalienable right - as it applies to illegal aliens. Is he suggesting that the Founders were thinking those here illegally had the same weight of "pursuit of happiness" in America as legal American citizens? If that is the case, then I'm sure I can't agree with him on this whole point.

I guess in the end I have a problem granting those who are here illegally a benefit that fully legal American citizens that pay taxes and support the less fortunate in our country do not. For the record, I'm also in favor of not allowing executives recruited here to get in-state tuition if they don't live here. As Mr Brophy says, they can get in-state tuition in the state in which they live.

Bit concerned; not sure I will be able to support Mr Brophy - it seems logical to assume he is also in favor of Amnesty for illegal aliens - which I strongly oppose.

[funkymonkey1111]

and therein is a reason he will not win widespread support. he can put a semi-auto in his pants and huck it up at starbucks, but he's pro illegal, and that just doesn't cut it.

[newracer]

So you believe he should just pander for votes like almost all politicians do? Although I don't totally agree with his stance on it the more I think about it the more I agree with it. Just remember there is not a candidate that will have the same views as you do on every issue.

[UrbanWolf]

Trades offs, it sucks. Even the hardcore anti-illegals usually won't do anything about them.

[lowbeyond]

you know how to make this issue irrelevant?

stop subsiding college.

nope cant to that though because..... xyz. we played by the rules, they promised us.. what else...? just go down the list of the excuses justifications of stealing your neighbors property at gun point and giving it to you because -- it benefits you.

[screagle2]

As important as our 2nd Amendment rights are, I am glad to see someone else, also sees that there are more issues at stake than just one. I spent several hours with Greg debating this issue, and found his argument to be mostly emotional. He kept referring to how many football games the Yuma team had one, since their team had illegals on it as well as the paper tiger arguments mentioned above, not what I would categorise as a well thought position.

He may turn out to be the best candidate, but once again, I would hope that everyone spends more time seriously studying his stances on ALL the issues we face, as he has proven to be all over the board, and often changes his colors.

[Rucker61]

So do you pick a candidate who totally aligns with your beliefs, or do you live with Hickenlooper for another four years?

[DavieD55]

Another thing that people should consider is where he stands on election fraud. The dems have been changing the election laws, ramming legislation through that legalizes election fraud. Last year it was HB13-1303 ( Which is currently on the books and is law in Colorado) and this year with HB14-1164.

Here is a short clip of Senator Brophy from last year speaking in opposition to HB13-1303.


http://youtu.be/s4z6jkRdIOs

[OneGuy67]

The question that always has bugged me about this issue is, what do they do once they get that college education? They are still illegal aliens and should not be obtaining jobs without proper identification and credentials. They aren't going to go back to their native country afterwards and are they getting grants and tuition assistance to attend college that should rightfully be given/offered to our own citizens. I can't support Brophy in this l.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk

[screagle2]

So do you pick a candidate who totally aligns with your beliefs, or do you live with Hickenlooper for another four years?

I didn't vote for him before, and certainly will not now, so your question holds little. It is not an either-or question at this point, but to directly answer you, yes I will vote for someone that is aligned with the greater number of my concerns, and that I have an idea will stay aligned with those, than someone on one single item. There are a number of the amendments that are under assault, as well as a lengthy list of items that are a direct assault on our country as we know it. Do you think that after illegals are given asylum, they will not next be given voting privileges?
Yes, I will vote for whoever mist closely aligns with ALL if my concerns. I live and own a business in rural Colorado, and have closely followed Greg for years. Is he better than Hick? Obviously. Are there better out there. Yes, I believe so, and a couple are still considering running.
I will wait and hope that someone who shares many of Greg's views, and can be depended upon to stay with those views enters the race.

What they do down the road, and have done in the past, is more important in my mind, than what they may say at the onset of their campaign,
to me anyway.

[Rucker61]

I didn't vote for him before, and certainly will not now, so your question holds little. It is not an either-or question at this point, but to directly answer you, yes I will vote for someone that is aligned with the greater number of my concerns, and that I have an idea will stay aligned with those, than someone on one single item. There are a number of the amendments that are under assault, as well as a lengthy list of items that are a direct assault on our country as we know it. Do you think that after illegals are given asylum, they will not next be given voting privileges?
Yes, I will vote for whoever mist closely aligns with ALL if my concerns. I live and own a business in rural Colorado, and have closely followed Greg for years. Is he better than Hick? Obviously. Are there better out there. Yes, I believe so, and a couple are still considering running.
I will wait and hope that someone who shares many of Greg's views, and can be depended upon to stay with those views enters the race.

What they do down the road, and have done in the past, is more important in my mind, than what they may say at the onset of their campaign,
to me anyway.

Good points all, but does "better than Greg" mean "more electable than Greg"? The goal is to capture 11% of the middle.

[UrbanWolf]

Just remember when we divide our vote into 40%. 30%, 30% onto three Republican candidates, the Liberals are going all out getting Hickenlooper reelected, even though a lot of them are mad at his stance on Fracking. And when the day came that we really became California Ver. 2, try to remember why we lost.

[funkymonkey1111]

Just remember when we divide our vote into 40%. 30%, 30% onto three Republican candidates, the Liberals are going all out getting Hickenlooper reelected, even though a lot of them are mad at his stance on Fracking. And when the day came that we really became California Ver. 2, try to remember why we lost.

the recollection that one of the major republican candidates supports illegals like juan mcsame or diane feinstein would be quite fresh in my mind.

[Ronin13]

Just remember when we divide our vote into 40%. 30%, 30% onto three Republican candidates, the Liberals are going all out getting Hickenlooper reelected, even though a lot of them are mad at his stance on Fracking. And when the day came that we really became California Ver. 2, try to remember why we lost.
THIS.
It's the united front thought we need to be taking, instead of the idea that "Oh crap, the main front runner has a few issues I am against so I'll just vote for the obscure 3rd candidate who has a .003% chance of actually winning." It's actually working out really well for the democrats... Hick, Oblahblah, and the Dem sweep of the CO Legislature.

[lilpromisedland]

To me, this vote proves that Greg is not a "squishy" politician. He will stand up for what he believes is right even if it's controversial. The only person who I will always agree with 100% of the time is...me. I think we need to look at the big picture and the 11+ years of his voting record to judge his character.

By the way, Greg is NOT in favor of amnesty for illegal aliens.

[SenatorBrophy]

I love the discourse and will try to answer a few questions.

Under Deferred Action these kids can work in the US if they are under 30 and aren't a felon.
I oppose amnesty. I want a double fence built and a real visa system implemented that allows people to come here to work and another system that allows people to come here to become Americans.

From a political perspective, my vote for ASSET should prove that I'm anything but a typical politician. I said at the time that this vote will cause problems in GOP primaries and that the vote was courageous. At the time, I was speaking of other senators, as I had no intention of running for any other office. Compare that to Tancredo's term limits pledge, which he made to help him win a primary. He broke that pledge so he could keep his $170,000 a year job in Congress. Political expediency is ugly. Tancredo also vote for gun control while in Congress. He was under a lot of pressure by Tom Mauser, etal and he folded. He then made public comments that make Hicklooper look like a gunnie.

I have never, and will never, let you down on the Second Amendment. Period. You can count on that. RMGO knows that and that is why the endorsed me.

I want to earn your support. I'm not a typical politician. I'm a typical Coloradan. I'll protect your liberty and solve the problems you want your state government to solve.

Greg

[SenatorBrophy]

Not true.

I make fun of the Yuma football program all the time, but never, ever, say anything like that. As a matter of fact you can see my argument on line any time you want. I make fun of Yuma in it too. Look up the second reading discussion on SB13-033.

[SenatorBrophy]

As important as our 2nd Amendment rights are, I am glad to see someone else, also sees that there are more issues at stake than just one. I spent several hours with Greg debating this issue, and found his argument to be mostly emotional. He kept referring to how many football games the Yuma team had one, since their team had illegals on it as well as the paper tiger arguments mentioned above, not what I would categorise as a well thought position.

He may turn out to be the best candidate, but once again, I would hope that everyone spends more time seriously studying his stances on ALL the issues we face, as he has proven to be all over the board, and often changes his colors.


Not true.


I make fun of the Yuma football program all the time, but never, ever, say anything like that. As a matter of fact you can see my argument on line any time you want. I make fun of Yuma in it too. Look up the second reading discussion on SB13-033.

[OneGuy67]

Senator,

Nice to have you on the forum. Welcome!

As you can read, we all have differing opinions on some of the stances you have taken and some of the votes you have cast.

I for one, disapprove of your vote on the ASSET bill; I also disapprove of Metro State and their decision to allow illegal aliens in-state tuition prior to the ASSET bill. I disapprove of driver's licenses for illegal aliens. All these things that are a benefit to those who are living here illegally, will encourage other illegal aliens to come to Colorado. The political climate is favorable to them, so why wouldn't they?

If you become the Republican candidate, I will vote for you as I do believe we only have a viable two party system and I'm not voting for the other guy. However, your record on illegal aliens does cause me concern and that will influence my vote in the Republican primaries.

Good to have you on our forum. I look forward to any additional thoughts you may have and wish to share with us all.

[wctriumph]

Hi Greg, welcome to the forum and I hope you will be a regular contributor beyond the politics. There are many areas of the forum to particpate in and I hope you will make the most of what the mod's offer here.

Lets take Colorado back for the Citizens of Colorado and kick those lousy east and west coast pansies out of office. Good luck in the election.


TEA

III

[Bailey Guns]

Welcome to the forum Sen Brophy!

I have to echo what OneGuy said. I believe the illegal immigration situation in this state and the country is a huge problem. I'm not really for rounding everyone up and sending them back to their native countries (mostly because that would be impossble) but I don't think that rewarding illegals is the way to solve the problem, either. Sure, it isn't the fault of the children...but it sure doesn't discourage the parents from perpetuating the problem, either.

I sincerely thank you for your strong support of gun owners and gun rights in the legislature, especially last year.

However, your stance on illegal immigration may cost you my vote in the primary. However, regardless of that stance, if you're the republican candidate in November you'll have my vote.

[kidicarus13]

I for one, disapprove of your vote on the ASSET bill; I also disapprove of Metro State and their decision to allow illegal aliens in-state tuition prior to the ASSET bill. All these things that are a benefit to those who are living here illegally, will encourage other illegal aliens to come to Colorado. The political climate is favorable to them, so why wouldn't they?

your record on illegal aliens does cause me concern and that will influence my vote in the Republican primaries.


+1 Well stated.

[KAPA]

I love the discourse and will try to answer a few questions....

...

I have never, and will never, let you down on the Second Amendment. Period. You can count on that. RMGO knows that and that is why the endorsed me.

I want to earn your support. I'm not a typical politician. I'm a typical Coloradan. I'll protect your liberty and solve the problems you want your state government to solve.

Greg


Just the fact that you posted on here makes me want to vote for you and when I read that, I can say for sure that you have my vote.

My question is though, if you are not the republican candidate, will you then throw all of your support for whoever is? The last thing we need here at this moment in Colorado is a third party candidate that gives this state to the Dems. Greg, I hope you win and can restore some freedom to our great state, but I also hope if (for whatever reason) your campaign fails, you will realize that the most important thing is to not let our state go the way of California.

Best of luck!

[lowbeyond]

So do you pick a candidate who totally aligns with your beliefs, or do you live with Hickenlooper for another four years?

totally man.

i mean last time for POTUS it was a person from MA who banned guns and instituted socialized health care vs someone who institute health care and only wanted to ban guns.

if you didn't vote fore the first you are a libtard.

guess what no matter what hickendickwad says or signs nor what some people with a fancy title in the legislature do... it takes WILLING VOLUNTEERS in the bureaucracy who say xzy has broken the LAW and then the volunteers in the enforcement arm of the State - aka cops enforce the bullshit by threatening to kill those who disagree.

but whatever, that last clause of a simple irrefutable truth has branded me a cop hater (tm). keep hanging out with your neighbor who volunteers to enforce or proclaim some BS cause you know... in july they make some kick ass ribs.

*shrug*

[ChunkyMonkey]

Anyone but gun grabbers in 2014!

[Aloha_Shooter]

Just remember when we divide our vote into 40%. 30%, 30% onto three Republican candidates, the Liberals are going all out getting Hickenlooper reelected, even though a lot of them are mad at his stance on Fracking. And when the day came that we really became California Ver. 2, try to remember why we lost.

^
This.

[Ronin13]

Senator Brophy, thank you! You still can count on my vote and support for the governorship this year! Keep up the good work!

[SamuraiCO]

Welcome Senator Brophy. This topic unfortunately has no easy answers without Federal action properly dealing with border security, revamping the visa program and how to fairly deal with those who came illegally.

For now I can live with instate tuition. It is a bandaid for a state issue dealing with Federal inability to solve this problem. If it were upnto me I would have Hillsdale College develope a oral and written exam in english for their 10 part constitutional series they have online for free. Anyone that had come here illegally and could pass this exam then allow them citizenship.


I want a Gov who will be a strong advocate for a business friendly environment, controll state spending, fully embrace the energy production from natural gas and oil from fracking. Of course 2A rights on this forum goes without saying.

Wish you the best of luck and looking forward to the primaries and vetting our best candidate to beat The Looper and move our state back into the red state status.

[HBARleatherneck]

I'm a typical Coloradan. I'll protect your liberty and solve the problems you want your state government to solve.

Greg

unfortunately the typical Coloradan is a liberal democrat. I think you can see over the last 100 years we have had many more democrat governors than republican ones. From 1975 to now we have only had 8 years of republican governorship. Since 1947 we have had 43 years of democrat governors and 24 years of republican governors. Im not sure saying you are a typical Coloradan is good.

The problem I want the state government to solve is...how to get smaller, repeal as many unnecessary laws as possible and stay the hell out of our lives. I bet you cant make that happen.

[blacklabel]

The problem I want the state government to solve is...how to get smaller, repeal as many unnecessary laws as possible and stay the hell out of our lives. I bet you cant make that happen.

HBAR nailed what I was thinking.

[Ronin13]

unfortunately the typical Coloradan is a liberal democrat. I think you can see over the last 100 years we have had many more democrat governors than republican ones. From 1975 to now we have only had 8 years of republican governorship. Since 1947 we have had 43 years of democrat governors and 24 years of republican governors. Im not sure saying you are a typical Coloradan is good.

The problem I want the state government to solve is...how to get smaller, repeal as many unnecessary laws as possible and stay the hell out of our lives. I bet you cant make that happen.
Touche! To the conservative mind that's not asking much, but to a democrat... that's a pretty tall order.