The state could soon allow children of people without legal immigration status in Connecticut to pay in-state tuition rates at local colleges.
The House passed Connecticut’s version of the “DREAM Act” on Thursday, 77-63, after a lengthy debate and it now moves on to the state Senate.
Thirteen Democrats joined the minority Republicans in the House in opposition. Democratic Gov. Dannel P. Malloy has indicated that he supports the legislation.
Supporters said the bill would help students whose parents brought them to the United States illegally and offer them the path to citizenship and to become productive citizens.
“I am extremely pleased to see us moving forward with this legislation,” State Rep. Juan Candelaria, a Democrat from New Haven, said in a release. “As I have stated before, this measure makes a lot of sense because nobody who wants to study should be denied that opportunity, regardless of their immigration status. Today, I celebrate with the students who have been penalized by no fault on their own. We are a step closer to finally making this happen.”
Opponents said the legislation creates an unjustifiable loophole to take advantage of the cheaper tuition and might take away spots in the state's higher education system from legal, tax-paying residents.
"When someone gets in, someone gets denied. There's a winner and there's a loser," said House Minority Leader Lawrence Cafero Jr., R-Norwalk. "We're changing the rules that might be very, very unfair to a lot of people."
Local
If the bill passes, it would apply to in-state tuition at the University of Connecticut, the Connecticut State University system schools, the community-technical colleges or Charter Oak State College. The difference in cost between in-state and out-of-state tuition is significant.
At the University of Connecticut, the in-state rate for students who live off campus is $10,416 versus $26,880 for out-of-state commuter students. At the four state universities, the difference in tuition is $8,043 versus $18,408; and $3,406 versus $10,178 at the community-technical colleges.
The bill applies to Connecticut residents who have completed four years of high school in the state and provide an affidavit stating that they have filed an application to become a legal permanent resident in the state.
Undocumented students would not qualify for financial aid under this legislation.
As the debate went on, several lawmakers talked about their own personal situations.
Rep. Tony Hwang, R-Fairfield, whose parents immigrated to the U.S. from Taiwan, said he was voting against the bill out of respect for his mother and father and other immigrants who came to this country legally.
"Those same immigrants who made an earnest and sincere effort to obtain the American citizenship, they went through hoops and obstacles to live the American Dream," he said.
Rep. Selim Noujaim, R-Waterbury, an immigrant from Lebanon, recalled arriving in the U.S. in 1971, only knowing how to say "thank you" in English. His first job was in a textile mill in Waterbury and he worked his way through school, eventually obtaining citizenship.
"No one offered me a tuition break. I had to work for every single penny that I earned," Noujaim said. "I don't know how right and how fair it is just to hand somebody something without working for it."
Yet Rep. William Tong, D-Stamford, the son of Chinese immigrants, spoke on the House floor how his family was able to remain in the U.S. after his father, in a last-ditch effort, wrote a letter to then-President Richard Nixon about how he had discovered the American dream and wanted to stay in the country after being reported to immigration authorities. About a week before the family planned to leave voluntarily, a letter arrived telling them they could apply for citizenship.
"If Richard Nixon had not given my father a chance, I would not have had the opportunities I've known," said Tong. "This bill is not about undocumented or illegal people. It's not about criminals. … "It's about people just like us, who because of circumstance, because of history, because of opportunity, are one-half shade different than we are."
