HB 59 would prohibit all 35 public universities and colleges as well as 26 in the Technical College System from admitting undocumented students, regardless of their academic credentials.

This bill is economically shortsighted, fundamentally unjust, and unnecessary.

Economically Shortsighted

 Denying higher education access to Georgia’s undocumented students fails to capitalize on the state’s investment in the students’ K-12 education.

 Many students may well regularize their status under current or future federal laws and are likely to remain in Georgia.

 Facilitating educational access to students also promotes economic growth. By increasing the number of college graduates who earn higher wages, Georgia generates significantly more income, sales, and property taxes.

 If this bill were to become law, undocumented students will not be able to utilize their full potential to advance the competitive edge of the state that is their home.

Fundamentally Unjust

 Banning access to public higher education to students who graduate from high school in Georgia violates principles of fundamental fairness recognized by the U.S. Supreme Court in the 1982 landmark case of Plyler v. Doe. Undocumented students are by and large talented high achievers who were brought to the U.S. as children by their parents. They persevered against the odds to earn their admission to college.

 Higher education is also increasingly essential to an individual’s potential and opportunity.

Unnecessary

 Only 501 of 310,000 students within the University System of Georgia were found to be undocumented per an investigation conducted by the Board of Regents. It is unwise to burden a great number of school administrators as well as students with authorized status with additional verification requirements in an attempt to exclude a small number of students who are otherwise qualified and paying their own way.

 In addition, allowing undocumented students to enroll in public colleges and universities in Georgia poses no additional cost to the state. These students are already paying out of state tuition which covers more than the cost of instruction

Download the Fact Sheet

Lawmakers Need Accurate Information About Long-Term Savings Potential of Proposed Bills

States are missing opportunities to pass legislation that would reform criminal justice systems and help alleviate budget shortfalls because legislators are not getting accurate information about how much money the bills would save, according to a new American Civil Liberties Union report released today.

The process of evaluating the fiscal impact of proposed legislation needs to be overhauled, the report finds, because too often states fail to provide legislators with information about the long-term savings potential of bills and instead focus only on up-front costs.

“States are needlessly spending billions of dollars incarcerating people even in the face of research proving that there are far cheaper and more effective solutions to crime,” said Inimai Chettiar, ACLU legislative policy counsel who co-authored the report along with the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. “It is imperative that lawmakers get full and complete budget analyses of proposed legislation aimed at reducing our prison populations so that they can see how these laws will help balance their budgets while continuing to protect public safety – and then take action to enact these laws.”

According to the report, it costs states between $18,000 and $30,000 per prisoner per year, and of the 2.3 million people incarcerated nationally, the vast majority are housed in state prison systems. Over the past 25 years, state corrections spending has grown 674 percent, according to the report, outpacing the growth of other government expenditures and making corrections the fourth-largest category of state spending. The report also finds that since the late 1980s, 14 states have doubled their spending and 30 states have increased their spending by half.

“Accurate and complete information about the budgetary costs and savings of criminal justice reforms will help states reduce this exorbitant spending while protecting communities and combating the vast racial disparities that plague the nation’s criminal justice system,” said Chettiar.

Some 40 percent of the legislation proposed in statehouses across the nation does not receive any sort of fiscal analysis. Without an official certification that a bill would save money, legislators are less inclined to vote for it, the report says. And even when states do analyze the fiscal impact of bills, the majority of them fail to analyze that impact beyond a year or two.

Compounding the problem, the methodology used to arrive at fiscal impact conclusions is often not made clear, which hampers the ability of lawmakers and the public to decide how accurate a given conclusion is.

A full copy of the report, “Improving Budget Analysis of State Criminal Justice Reforms: A Strategy for Better Outcomes and Saving Money,” can be found at:  www.aclu.org/criminal-law-reform/improving-budget-analysis-state-criminal-justice-reforms-strategy-better

ACLU Blog  - Downsizing Incarceration is Good for Fairness, Safety, and our Wallets

The Obama administration announced today that it will keep in place a proposed rule from the Department of Health and Human Services that determines which essential services are covered by new health insurance plans. The administration resisted heavy pressure from the United States Conference on Catholic Bishops and other groups to permit a broad range of religiously affiliated organizations to deny contraception coverage to their employees.  The administration’s decision will ensure effective birth control will be more affordable for millions of women.

“Virtually all women from all religious backgrounds use contraception at some point in their lives to protect their health and plan their families and their lives,” said Laura W. Murphy, director of the American Civil Liberties Union Washington Legislative Office. ”With today’s action, the administration refused to give religious employers the right to discriminate.”

 Have you noticed how some candidates pursuing the presidency are bending, twisting and misconstruing our precious Constitution to fit their personal views?  The ACLU has taken note, and with our mission of protecting the Constitution, we’re not happy about it.

That’s why we’ve launched ACLU Liberty Watch 2012. While other people will focus on flip-flopping and political maneuvering, ACLU Liberty Watch is the one and only initiative solely focused on how candidates of all parties discuss the Constitution and the fundamental laws and liberties of our country.

Join ACLU Liberty Watch 2012 today by following us on Twitter and Facebook.

The ACLU is determined to make sure civil liberties, freedom, justice and equality are at the heart of campaign discourse and that they are represented fairly and accurately.

As a non-partisan organization, the ACLU does not endorse any candidate, but we still have a role to play in this election. Through ACLU Liberty Watch 2012, we’re monitoring what all the candidates are saying about our constitutional rights and setting the record straight when they play fast and loose with our civil liberties. We’re even assembling a report card to rate the candidates on their civil liberties track records.

Help us watch the candidates and hold them accountable. Follow ACLU Liberty Watch 2012 on Twitter and Facebook.