Controversy continues to swirl over the prospect that the state House of Representatives could send two similar bills to the Senate that could provide taxpayer funds for private K-12 education for illegal aliens. Yet despite this prospect, some GOP lawmakers are promoting these hastily-pushed bills as “school choice” legislation.
State Rep. Wes Cantrell, R-Woodstock
Here’s what has happened so far in the legislative process. Rep. Wes Cantrell, R-Woodstock, guided one of the two bills, HB 60, through the House Education Committee and apparently through House Rules, making it ready for a floor vote. Last week the other, HB 999, went through the Education Subcommittee. Both versions were “committee substitutes” (i.e. new re-written sections that the committee has not seen before).
Cantrell, as this is written, has not explained the new language and InsiderAdvantage will contact him for a response. And we’re pursuing this especially since Chairman Matt Dubnik, R-Gainesville, didn’t allow public questions on HB 60 (video).
To help in analyzing HB 999, we reached out to Dustin Inman Society President D.A. King. Here’s his response:
“Language in Cantrell’s legislation essentially says that a K-12 student who can point to parent, guardian or custodian who lives in Georgia and who has attended public K-12 school in Georgia for six weeks can access a new “Promise Scholarship.” The state would pay $6,000 per school year to an account set up for the student. (“Fund students not systems!”) A commission would be formed to ‘develop a system for parents to direct account funds to participating schools and service providers by… (a) system that the commission finds to be commercially viable, cost-effective, and easy for parents of participating students to use.’
Of course, since there are hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants already in Georgia and more coming due to the Biden open borders policy, what about all the “undocumented” immigrants in Georgia school systems? Cantrell, in a response, claims “…only students who are currently enrolled in Georgia public schools are eligible (under the bills) and it saves taxpayer dollars.”
Hold that thought while we return to the added legislative language that Cantrell claims is a way to winnow out illegal aliens from access to the scholarship money. He wants to refer to a little-known state verification system already in place. Yet Cantrell didn’t mention the new verification language in his committee presentations.
Now consider that Georgia law OCGA 50-36-1 sets the procedure for verifying eligibility of applicants for public benefits. In general, it requires applicants to swear they are eligible for a long list of public benefits because of either U.S. citizenship, a lawful permanent resident (“green card” holder) or “a qualified alien or non-immigrant under the Federal Immigration and Nationality Act with an alien number issued by the Department of Homeland Security or other federal immigration agency” on a notarized affidavit.
In addition, the applicant is supposed to provide at least one “secure and verifiable document” to prove status and or identity. Then the office administering the benefit is supposed to run the information gathered on foreigners through a federal database called “SAVE” operated by the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service.
King notes that Cantrell says the “parents” would also be required to be verified. Which means they would be required to complete an application for a public benefit. That doesn’t make sense.
“It is difficult to explain how uninformed the set up really is,” King notes, “but it isn’t a workable way to stop taxpayers from funding private school education for illegal aliens in Georgia. In the process described above, before a K-12 student or his parent (s) can meet the applicable verification requirements provided in the law Cantrell cites, they must be asked to reveal their immigration status.”
Yet that’s a problem, so knowledge of the 1982 U.S. Supreme Court decision Plyer v Doe Supreme Court decision is now essential. The ruling said states must offer K-12 public education to all students regardless of immigration status – and courts say that attendance cannot be hindered by even asking them about their immigration status — apparently, parents included.
Nothing in the high court ruling applies to private schools. That leads King to ask the big question: “Can a state ask the immigration status of a K-12 student for the scholarship? We aren’t sure. Confused yet?”
To address his own question, King advances this proposal:
“From here we offer an alternate, simpler idea. Limit the scholarship eligibility to U.S. Citizens and Lawful Permanent Residents. A required, dedicated application can be created that requires parents or guardians and custodians of applicants for the state scholarship to enter a valid Social Security Number for both the student scholarship recipient and the parent, guardian, custodian who will be authorized to deal with disbursement of the state money. This along with certified proof of U.S. citizenship or LPR status.”
“It could work,” he concludes.
