Depending upon the individual state, the variously estimated costs of educating a single student each year in public education can be anywhere from $5,978 (Utah) to $17,800 (New Jersey). This is also a cost unwittingly borne by most communities each year for illegal aliens. In addition to this basic burden, the financial pains are dramatically increased by English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) programs which provide special bi-lingual courses for Hispanics at an estimated cost per student of $3,500 per year.
This combination of annual subsidized education and special courses for “illegals” not only costs the taxpayer; it also ‘costs’ American students. In order to provide money for ESOL programs to aid illegal aliens, various internal budgets in schools are reduced, thereby diminishing services to American students.
A case in point is Manassas, Virginia, where the overall school budget was reduced—except ESOL, where it was increased. So, in order to provide more aid to illegal aliens, American students are deprived of academic services, sports equipment and even books. For example, one school course in Manassas has an excess of Spanish-language books, and not enough English ones. Furthermore, illegal aliens generally receive free lunches, and often receive free breakfasts and free after-school meals. These freebees to foreigners add even more burdens to the taxpayer. In essence, more money is spent per student on illegal aliens than on Americans.
Still more disconcerting, many school boards (including Manassas) do not even count how many “illegals” are enrolled in their education system. Some school boards hide behind the deceitful veil of political correctness, while others don their mantel of government arrogance and allude to some divine mystery by falsely claiming that an esoteric federal or state law prohibits them from counting the number of “illegals” who are being subsidized. When asked to provide the specific citation of any law, they cannot do so. At best, they refer to the Supreme Court decision of Plyler vs. Doe (1982) and "interpret" the decision to mean that one cannot ask even the most fundamental question concerning the students whom taxpayers are supposed to help.
A survey of schools reveals another insidious aspect of the ESOL program: it has created and is fostering a ‘separate but equal’ society within the school system. Parents know, and educators are compelled to admit, that Hispanic students in ESOL programs refuse to integrate into the general school population. By having their own private ESOL courses—not merely for learning the English language, but also for standard curriculum courses taught with a Spanish interpreter or translator—they are officially segregated by the school. And, they remain that way, declining to even engage fellow students in English. Hence, the ESOL programs are officially creating a ‘separate but equal’ society in violation of federal law.
Ironically, the costs of ESOL programs are not merely financial. California, the state with the largest illegal alien population, adopted Proposition 242 to create an English immersion program. After several years the State concluded that students excel better in overall test scores if they are immersed in English language courses, rather than being coddled in a bi-lingual education program. Thus, maintaining an ESOL program is harmful to the participants. Therefore, keeping the Hispanics confined to ESOL programs not only burdens the taxpayers, it also impedes the vocational development of the students, diminishes their ability to network in English, and hinders their prospects for integrating in the overall English-speaking society in the United States.
In addition, it deprives young students of the psychology to expend an extra effort to succeed, even by something as basic as learning another language when one is a resident of the society. One should note too that the ESOL courses are fundamentally for Hispanics. Other ethnic groups do not receive such ‘beneficial’ treatment. For example, Asians do not—and they are usually at the top of the class.
Given the above, are we to conclude that the ESOL programs are really for the benefit of the Hispanic students? Or are they kept in place to provide employment for more teachers and translators, at the expense of taxpayers and students, and to the detriment of the Hispanic students that are the recipients of this public dole? Or, should we conclude that school boards and local officials have a racist view and low estimate of the Hispanic work ethic and intelligence?
It is clear that local officials and school boards are following their own hidden agenda and perpetuating another ‘separate but equal’ society whom they can govern and exploit for their own political purposes.
-Charles Sutherland is an international business consultant and author.
