At Saturday’s gubernatorial debate in Fresno held by Univision, an unidentified and undocumented honors student at Fresno State asked a question about the DREAM Act that, I argued, offered the most important moment of the debate. Whereas Jerry Brown made a strong moral defense of all California’s children getting the chance to succeed in school and become citizens to contribute to our society, Whitman attacked the student and essentially told her she didn’t belong in school and was taking the place of a California citizen.
Today the student has spoken out about the way her question was answered, in a press release from the California Young Democrats:
In an anonymous statement provided to CYD the student said, “Ms. Whitman’s response made me feel undeserving of my academic success… until I realized that I was not admitted into universities because I was undocumented but because I was a hard-working student who maintained great grades, got myself involved, and did countless hours of community service. My education is the only thing I really have in this country, besides my friends and family, and I don’t understand why she would belittle my hard work and that of all other students in my situation. If Ms. Whitman cannot support young successful immigrants, how can she claim she will serve the Latino community?”
This is a devastating response to Whitman. The student in question is a model to young Californians around the state, regardless of their background or immigration status. Every parent wishes they could have a child who has the kind of academic success this student has had.
She should be the kind of person we build California’s future around. Instead, Meg Whitman believes this hardworking and successful young student should be kicked out of school, and probably kicked out of California. Whitman doesn’t see a successful student, she instead sees someone who can at best be exploited before being tossed aside.
Whitman’s former housekeeper may be getting the media attention. But it is Whitman’s awful, dismissive attitude towards a successful young college student that ought to define the choices Californians face in this election.
I stand with this student. I hope you do too.
And an appropriate response from the student.
Meg Whitman is disgusting.
Most of us are children, grand-children, or multi-generational descendants of immigrants. Whether they came over on the Mayflower in the 17th Century, moved to the California missions from Spain in the 16th Century, or arrived in the back of a truck in 2010, they’ve come here with the dream of improving their lives. They’ve built this place (not without mistakes.)
Meg Whitman — at some point, your ancestors were immigrants.
None of us should deny that same opportunity to others.
With that response, the honors student from Fresno State is more qualified to run for governor than NutMeg.
All this young woman did was do what the Republicans say we all should do: get an education, pull yourself up by your own bootstraps, etc., etc., and now NutMeg insists on turning her back on someone who is a bona fide California success story.
This is an obviously talented and smart young woman.
It is a sad shame because she is not legally here, she is unable to VOTE in the upcoming election where her voice would be even stronger.
While I agree that she is smart and should not be subject to ridicule, (and I may have missed this information somewhere) but I hope she plans to become a citizen the legal way. There are many immigrants who have entered illegally either by choice or no choice (i.e.,by birth or otherwise).
Those who have been waiting to become citizens have to go through a process and have been waiting a long time. I hope this young woman who is obviously intelligent will realize that and become a legal citizen, and continue to live in the USA and give back to the country which she has only known.
This may spark controversy, but it is true, she can’t legally vote.
I am not voting for Meg Whitman. I am just an old Latina who was born in CA and I wanted to point that fact out. Thank you.
doesn’t seek out this young woman, expose her identity and subject her to persecution and maybe even deportation. It wouldn’t surprise me if they did. It’s their way.
I also don’t believe Republicans want a solution to any immigration question, “illegal” or otherwise. Charles Krauthammer, obviously of Native American descent, would suggest to build and finish a great and massive barrier before taking any action to resolve the issue, because you know, it’s just going to happen again, and well, more people will want to tackle the question if they could be assured that illegal immigration will never ever happen again. What a disingenuous jerk.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/…
One of the things that attracted me to Calitics was the desire for Discussion of political issues we face. One of my frustrations here are the Proclamations. I would like to encourage more discussion- idea exchanging, debating and consensus building. I sometimes feel that we, who call ourselves progressive, are too often dismissed because we shout from the edges rather than get in the middle of the issue and listen, respond and try to move the discussion.
The illegal immigration issue is a tough one. The US accepts more legal immigrants as permanent residents each year than all other countries combined. Over 1,100,000 people in 2009. Over 40% of these were newly-landed in the USA. That’s like adding a new Santa Clara, Cambridge Mass, Pueblo Colorado and Berkeley every year. And that’s legal immigration…. We add almost 3 million people a year in total [note: how much drinking water do we add a year? how much more food do we produce? – huge future issues IMHO]
California taxpayers fund almost $10,000 for every student in the State per year. Over this woman’s education, the People will have invested over $120,000 in her education. If she is talented and productive and gets a $60,000 a year job, it will take about 28 years in taxes to pay back the People of California.
Now she is certainly committed, hard-working and appears to be the type of youth we want to attract to California. But she may leave the State, become a stay-at-home mother or worse, become a Banker.
The People are making a significant commitment here with no guidelines to the college or commitment from the student. Would we be okay saying “we want to offer you a subsidized education but you have to either work for the State or pay income taxes to us for 4 years”?
Are there limits to the generosity of the People? Don’t there have to be?
Please do not respond with vitriol. I am simply trying to provide a viewpoint for discussion. Thank you.