ASU’s Crow backs lower tuition for illegals — again

Co$tly deception abounds

ASU President Michael Crow is back to his old tricks of dropping tuition rates for illegal alien students. We wrote this back in 2007, pointing out that Crow was skirting the provisions of Prop 300, a voter-approved law that, among other matters, requires such students pay higher, out-of-state tuition rates. The law passed overwhelmingly 1,060,444 to 423,994.

Fast forward to March 6, 2013. The amnesty-supporting Periódico de la República de Arizona (Arizona Republic) headline cheers the news: “Crow backs lower migrant tuition.” The daily newspaper is keen on cunningly using imprecise words such as “migrant” and “undocumented“ to describe illegals. “Migrants” sound deceptively akin to the swallows, making their yearly journey each March 19 to California’s Mission San Juan Capistrano, and departing for their home in Argentina the following October 23. Our “migrants” come here in violation of our laws and national sovereignty and never leave.

Acquaint yourself with the severe restrictions imposed by Mexico’s Constitution on foreign-born, naturalized Mexican citizens. Those who enter Mexico illegally are not even this fortunate.

Tuition and fee increases were the order of the day for Arizona’s three universities going into the 2011-12 school year as the Arizona Board of Regents provided the double-digit increases the schools requested.  ASU freshmen received a 20 percent hike, to $9,716 a year. UA undergraduates stared wide-eyed at a 22 percent increase, and  NAU students found themselves facing an 11 percent increase. At the time, only two of the nine regents voted against the increases. Room-and-board costs can add an additional $10,000.

It’s doubtful these real-world issues factor with the over-paid Crow. Crow’s wife Sybil Francis is also on the ASU payroll as a six-figure ‘senior advisor.’ (Her precise salary is well hidden.) Here’s a review worth checking out: Crow’s annual salary of $475,000 plus benefits comes in at $742,500. There’s that $50,000 housing allowance to assist in maintaining their exclusive $1,250,000 Paradise Valley digs, and a nifty $10,000 yearly car allowance. The ASU Foundation on which his wife serves as a “senior advisor” to the group advocating her husband’s pay increases, kicks in an additional $100,000 annually in compensation. His yearly $85,500 pension and $22,000 in retirement, would round it all out nicely…but then there are the proposed yearly crank-up bonuses: 2013: Up to $40,000, 2014: Up to $40,000, and the major step-up in 2015: Up to $180,000 for exceeding benchmarks for freshman retention, research revenue, bachelor’s degrees awarded and transfer students.

Living high, Michael Crow doesn’t quite get the plight of struggling students. The faltering economy is not on his radar screen.  He and his wife are clearly not in danger of losing their Paradise Valley mansion to foreclosure.

The crushingly large tuition hikes were frozen going into 2012-2013 for the first time in 20 years. Given Michael Crow’s grand scale generosity to foreign national students, expect tuition and fees to soar again for Arizona‘s citizen students. The money will have to come from somewhere.

About these ads

20 Responses to ASU’s Crow backs lower tuition for illegals — again

  1. PeeJay says:

    We are about to see many more illegal aliens, er, lofty migrants, showing up for tuition handouts. Since the Gang of Eight has signaled they are pushing amnesty-in-overdrive, the flood of illegals has spiked. This from “The Tidal Wave Has Begun” — Border Patrol Local 2544, submitted by Velcro, crossposted at Blogs For Borders.

    “Border Patrol union local 2544 in the Tucson sector reports that
    the influx of large groups of illegal aliens has begun crossing the
    Arizona border….We will continue to have large groups of illegal aliens chasing Border Patrol agents down so they can be “arrested”, knowing they will be set free and given temporary permission to remain here in the United States (no jail space to keep them locked up until their cases are adjudicated). Once they are set free with a “promise to appear” (wink, wink) 99% of them will disappear and never be heard from again unless they commit some heinous crime.”

    Strap on your water wings, the floodgates have just opened.

    • Stanford says:

      Pee Jay:
      You couldn’t be more correct. The floodgates are not only opened, but they are accompanied by flashing neon welcome signs. There are no legitimate means of determining who came here yesterday, tomorrow or who was brought in as a child by their invader parents, although that should not be a consideration, either. We are being sold out as a sovereign nation by our own elected so-called representatives of the people.

      Arizonans John McCain, Jeff Flake, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Floridian Marco Rubio have joined with some of the most liberal Democrats in selling us out. We should all commit their names to memory. Our children and grandchildren will wonder who led us down this path to utter destruction and they will deserve an answer. If they ask you if you voted for the Arizonans, how will answer? Will you have to admit to being party to this mammoth fraud?

      This disastrous move of legalizing our invading hordes is supposed to show how warm and “inclusive” we are. Why do you think Obama is pushing amnesty (regardless of what the fashionable name of the moment is)? He already had the majority of their votes. It is not the intent of the Democrats who are teaming up with this loathsome ‘Gang of Eight.’ They are not doing so to help Republicans win elections. Their goals are quite the opposite!

      These 4 Republican senators (none have ever regarded as conservatives to begin with), are either fools being suckered in and played for patsies or in collusion with the left’s vision of the ruination of the USA.

  2. Louise Ann says:

    It is “clear” to me that there is plenty of taxpayer money for everyone!!! Reading on market-ticker.org today I came across the following.

    “(CNSNews.com) – The Republican-controlled House of Representatives voted 267-151 on Wednesday to approve a $982-billion continuing resolution (CR) to fund the federal government through the rest of fiscal 2013 that fully funds the implementation of Obamacare during that period.

    The House Republican leaders turned aside requests from groups of conservative members to include language in the bill that would have withheld funding for implementation of all of Obamacare, or, alternatively, that would have withheld funding for the Obamacare regulation that requires health-plans to provide cost-free coverage for sterilizations, contraceptives and abortion-inducing drugs.”

    I looked at the HR 933 (roll call 62). Only 14 Republicans voted No. Only one from AZ – Matt Salmon. Therefore, I called Schweikert to protest. But who cares. Clearly, there is Plenty of Money for All. Keep the party rolling!! Just wait until we expand Medicaid!!

    • LD 7 PC says:

      Louise Ann,
      You whetted my appetite to find out more and I located this vote tally. I’d sure like to know more about the odd D/R breakdown of votes on this legislation:
      http://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/113-2013/h62

      Lots of unanswered questions, on this and so many other issues, I’m begining to feel like a mushroom…kept in the dark and covered with manure. Trying to keep up with all of the pretexts, is nearly impossible. I suspect that’s the idea.

  3. Westnash says:

    Good one SRAZ…throw more light on this type of waste!

    • eubykdisop says:

      Very nice attempt to make yourself appear to be a fiscal Conservative when you are really an Obama Liberal, Westnash.

      “Westnash says:
      February 14, 2013 at 10:17 am
      I would propose an immediate 10% cut in all military expenditures including salaries. All of us can get by on 9 out of 10…..the govt. can as well…it is nothing but would make a huge dent in the problem.”

      “Westnash says:
      February 18, 2013 at 3:35 pm
      What I worry that the Secure Our Borders bunch really wants is to spend Billions more in hiring and fences which do nothing but increase the size of Govt.”

      In the guise of being fiscally Conservative, you would weaken our military with thoughtless, across the board cuts and fail to spend the money necessary to secure our borders. Far from being Conservative, that fiscal ideology promotes the Obama, Liberal leftist agenda.

  4. Orion says:

    Michael Crow is a pompus elitist and an opportunist — on other people’s money. He’s probably angling for a poltical office down the road — as a Democrat.

  5. westnash says:

    Yes and he laughs all the way to the bank. Why are his sponsors allowed to waste this much money?

    • eubykdisop says:

      Alright, Westnash, time to put your fiscal Conservative posing and faux outrage to rest. Let’s look at where you really stand, which is with the Liberals and radical leftists.

      “Westnash says:
      February 14, 2013 at 10:17 am
      I would propose an immediate 10% cut in all military expenditures including salaries. All of us can get by on 9 out of 10…..the govt. can as well…it is nothing but would make a huge dent in the problem.”

      How do voters feel about your idea?

      “Shaving eight percent off the military budget, on the other hand, is opposed by 73 percent of Republicans and 63 percent of independents, with Democrats split down the middle.”

      http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/03/most-back-cuts-overall-but-not-to-the-military/

      You are urging the Conservatives here to support a 10% across the board cut in military spending. But 73% of Republicans and 63% of independents oppose cutting military spending by 8%! Your radical views are SO far to the left that, even among Democrats, only half support an 8% cut in military spending!

      Republicans will lose and Democrats will win if Republicans follow the broadly rejected ideas of the Liberal Westnashites!

      Have a nice day, Westy! :-)

  6. Delilah says:

    Please tell me who believed McStain with his “Build the dang fence”? RECALL,,,,,,,,,,,,,RECALL,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,RECALL

  7. Nicole Carlson says:

    I’m shocked at the ignorance here. Did you know that educated immigrants are far more likely to remain in the state? Did you know that the taxes they pay will more than recoup any difference between resident and non-resident tuition rates paid? Were you aware that these people are the parents and future parents of US citizens–citizens who are growing up in poverty and reliant on social programs because of the barriers in place to their parents being able to obtain post-secondary education? How does it make any sense to any of you that we provide free K-12 education and then drop the ball during that last four–the most important four–years?! Nobody is saying FREE tuition–what Crow is suggesting is EQUAL tuition for ALL GRADUATES of Arizona high schools, regardless of status. This impacts undocumented students just as much as it impacts certain classes of legally residing non-immigrant kids (such as my own–we’re Canadian and my oldest son is Canadian and moved here at 1 month old but is being forced to leave the state to go to school next year at age 18!).. Take the blinders off, folks–companies are refusing to set up business in Arizona because the education system stinks. I’m sorry that white folks don’t want to compete with people who have darker skin, but forcing them into poverty (read: “slavery”) because of the color of their skin has already been done with another sub-group of American society. Didn’t you learn the first time around?

    • eubykdisop says:

      Waaaa, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha! You came to the WRONG place to pitch that Liberal tripe, Darling! Hello, this is a Conservative Republican blog, not Daily Kos! We don’t drink Kool-Aid here. Pack it up and take it on the road with B. Hussein Obama, honey!

      Oh, and don’t let the door hit you in the butt on the way out!

    • Westnash says:

      There should be a careful study of all the students that are not Arizona residents that are escaping the out of state fee’s. Those foreign students with correct paperwork and documentation should be enrolled but at out of state rates. Illegals should be deported.

      • eubykdisop says:

        Really, Westnash? That’s interesting because while you say that you support deportation you don’t support spending money on securing the border nor do you support those who apprehend illegal aliens.

        “Westnash says:
        February 18, 2013 at 3:35 pm
        What I worry that the Secure Our Borders bunch really wants is to spend Billions more in hiring and fences which do nothing but increase the size of Govt.”

        The “Secure Our Borders bunch”? Such disdain!

        And you had this to say about Sheriff Joe Arpaio who apprehends illegal aliens:

        “Westnash says:
        March 1, 2013 at 9:06 am
        Interesting that when you have someone like Joe who continues to hang on…you have a real vacuum behind them. Their ego just wont let them develop a successor. Joe should retire soon and develop a strong successor…but I am afraid hubris has set in long ago.”

        You’re not fooling anyone, Westnash. You are an Obama Liberal.

    • Westnash says:

      Nicole, Actually the money spent on Arizona education is huge but the results are poor and you see people like this Crow getting huge salaries.

      Arizona is one of the few states in the nation that should not worry about companies looking to relocate here. Just have a decent tax system and they all scramble to leave California. There is no need to buy their business like we did for sports teams which taxpayers are now on the hook for.

      • eubykdisop says:

        You have no credibility regard fiscal matters, Westnash. Let’s analyze one of your fiscal proposals.

        “Westnash says:
        February 14, 2013 at 10:17 am
        I would propose an immediate 10% cut in all military expenditures including salaries. All of us can get by on 9 out of 10…..the govt. can as well…it is nothing but would make a huge dent in the problem.”

        How do voters feel about your idea?

        “Shaving eight percent off the military budget, on the other hand, is opposed by 73 percent of Republicans and 63 percent of independents, with Democrats split down the middle.”

        http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/03/most-back-cuts-overall-but-not-to-the-military/

        You are urging the Conservatives here to support a 10% across the board cut in military spending. But 73% of Republicans and 63% of independents oppose cutting military spending by 8%! Your radical views are SO far to the left that, even among Democrats, only half support an 8% cut in military spending!

        Republicans will lose and Democrats will win if Republicans follow the broadly rejected ideas of the Liberal Westnashites!

        Have a nice day, Westy! :-)

    • Louise Ann says:

      Being “forced” to leave the state? Please explain. Thanks.

  8. eubykdisop says:

    To Nicole Carlson:

    I’m shocked at your ignorance of the facts regarding The United States of America and the State of Arizona. Let me help you with that but first permit me to clarify that the above article is NOT about immigrants. It is about illegal aliens. Now, regarding the U. S.:

    •Illegal immigration costs U.S. taxpayers about $113 billion a year at the federal, state and local level. The bulk of the costs — some $84 billion — are absorbed by state and local governments.
    •The annual outlay that illegal aliens cost U.S. taxpayers is an average amount per native-headed household of $1,117. The fiscal impact per household varies considerably because the greatest share of the burden falls on state and local taxpayers whose burden depends on the size of the illegal alien population in that locality
    •Education for the children of illegal aliens constitutes the single largest cost to taxpayers, at an annual price tag of nearly $52 billion. Nearly all of those costs are absorbed by state and local governments.
    •At the federal level, about one-third of outlays are matched by tax collections from illegal aliens. At the state and local level, an average of less than 5 percent of the public costs associated with illegal immigration is recouped through taxes collected from illegal aliens.
    •Most illegal aliens do not pay income taxes. Among those who do, much of the revenues collected are refunded to the illegal aliens when they file tax returns. Many are also claiming tax credits resulting in payments from the U.S. Treasury.

    And as regards the State of Arizona:

    •Illegal aliens and their children were found to be 37 percent of the uninsured population in Arizona in 2008, and the cost of uncompensated care for illegal aliens in Arizona is $320 million annually.
    •The total education, medical, and incarceration costs in Arizona due to illegal immigration are $2.6 billion a year.

    Now, Nicole Carson, do you see anything in there about race? No, you don’t.

    The answer to the problem is to put a stop to illegal immigration and to deport those who are here illegally. That is fair. What makes that fair? What makes that fair, Nicole, is that it is the law AND that that law applies equally to all.

    Those who want the benefits which being a citizen of The United States of America provides need to first follow our laws and enter our country legally.

  9. Westnash says:

    We should absolutely have a law that says no state employee can be paid more than the governors salary. If some of the money is raised privately, like for a football coach, that is a different story.

    It is an absolute scam that these people are so overpaid and so many public officials go along with it.

    Call the out SRAZ.

    • eubykdisop says:

      Your fiscal proposals are unsound and rejected by voters as being too Liberal. Here is one example of how your Liberal leftist proposals are shunned by voters:

      “Westnash says:
      February 14, 2013 at 10:17 am
      I would propose an immediate 10% cut in all military expenditures including salaries. All of us can get by on 9 out of 10…..the govt. can as well…it is nothing but would make a huge dent in the problem.”

      How do voters feel about your idea?

      “Shaving eight percent off the military budget, on the other hand, is opposed by 73 percent of Republicans and 63 percent of independents, with Democrats split down the middle.”

      http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/03/most-back-cuts-overall-but-not-to-the-military/

      You are urging the Conservatives here to support a 10% across the board cut in military spending. But 73% of Republicans and 63% of independents oppose cutting military spending by 8%! Your radical views are SO far to the left that, even among Democrats, only half support an 8% cut in military spending!

      Republicans will lose and Democrats will win if Republicans follow the broadly rejected ideas of the Liberal Westnashites!

      Have a nice day, Westy! :-)

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 322 other followers