The following is a paper (minus citations) that I wrote for a college English class six summers ago. And here we are, still arguing and fighting about immigration reform.
The more some things change, the more they stay the same.
In Support of The Dream Act
The controversial Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors Act legislation, commonly known as The DREAM Act, was first introduced in the U.S. Senate on August 1, 2001 and re-introduced on May 11, 2011 in the Senate (S-952) by Richard Durbin and in the House (HR 1842) by Howard Berman, Democrats from Illinois and California respectively. The Dream Act would:
provide a path to conditional legal residency for undocumented immigrant students if he or she was 15 years old or younger when brought to the United States, has lived here for at least five years before enactment of law, is of good moral character and has earned a high school diploma or GED. Eligible students would have six years to earn permanent residency status if they complete two of years of higher education, or two years of military service with honorable discharge if discharged. (The DREAM Act).
Supporters of the bill believe that it’s a fair way of allowing eligible students to become legal residents and cite the “5 Reasons to Support the DREAM Act” to bolster their argument (America’s Voice) while opponents say its passage into law would serve as an incentive for others to enter the U.S. illegally (this argument is baseless due to the five-year residency requirement prior to the law’s enactment). As seems to be the case with everything in Washington, DC today, support for and opposition to the bill splits mainly along political party lines: Democrats for it, Republicans against it. However, when all is said and done, the DREAM Act should be voted into law.
A great deal of the opposition to this bill is based on the belief that no legal act should come from an illegal one. That tends to be the primary position of those who have voted against the bill in the past, especially on the Republican side. Representative Dana Rohrabacher of California went so far as to call it “affirmative action amnesty” when he urged colleagues to oppose it (Navarrette).
Many people make seemingly valid arguments against the DREAM Act. But, should society really punish children whose parents simply wanted a better life for them? Can it hold them accountable for something totally beyond their control? What about a child, a legal citizen or resident, whose parents move from say, Tennessee to California, for employment reasons? That child has no say in where he or she lives and neither does an undocumented immigrant of the same age in a similar situation.
So, what is it that fuels those on both sides of the argument? Republican Senator Jeff Sessions of Alabama, as conservative as they come, believes that “this bill is a law that at its fundamental core is a reward for illegal activity.” (Herszenhorn). However, in that same article, Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, a former Republican turned Independent, said:
I support the goal of the Dream Act which is to enable children who were brought to the United States by their parents to earn citizenship through service in the armed forces or pursuit of higher education. I do not believe that children are to blame for the decision of their parents to enter or remain in the United States unlawfully. The reality is that many of these children regard America as the only country they ever knew…America should provide these young people with the opportunity to pursue the American dream. They have much to offer America if given the chance.
There in a nutshell is the dilemma of the DREAM Act: should the federal government give undocumented students assistance, financial and otherwise, in their quest to achieve the American dream? On July 25th of this year, California Governor Jerry Brown signed into law his state’s version of the federal bill. This law, also known as the California Dream Act, allows illegal immigrants to receive privately funded scholarships to attend California’s public colleges and universities. Expressing a position that many Democrats take on this subject, Brown said at the signing ceremony, “At the end of the day, if we’re going to continue as a powerful, equal-opportunity society, we’re going to have to invest in our people.” (Dobuzinskis). Ironically, California’s approach is exactly the one many who supports the concept of “states’ rights” – political powers reserved for the U.S. state governments rather than the federal government – would approve of in many other situations, but not this one.
Other Democratic leaders, including President Obama, support the DREAM Act and are very vocal about their support. In a recent address to the National Council of La Raza, the largest Hispanic advocacy organization in the country, he said:
Five years ago, 23 Republican senators supported comprehensive immigration reform because they knew it was the right thing to do for the economy and it was the right thing to do for America. Today, they’ve walked away. Republicans helped write the DREAM Act because they knew it was the right thing to do for the country. Today, they’ve walked away. Last year, we passed the DREAM Act through the House only to see it blocked by Senate Republicans. It was heart- breaking to get so close and see politics get in the way, particularly because some of the folks who walked away had previously been sponsors of this…So, yes, feel free to keep the heat on me and keep the heat on Democrats. But here’s the only thing you should know. The Democrats and your President are with you. Are with you. Don’t get confused about that. Remember who it is that we need to move in order to actually change the laws. (Cohen).
While there are some African-Americans who oppose the DREAM Act for reasons known only to themselves, many support its passage. In fact, Leslie Watson Malachi, director of African American Ministers in action, an alliance of progressive African-American clergy, issued a statement that called the bill a “common-sense solution” to the problem (Malachi).
The reality of the situation today is that as long as Republicans control the House and maintain their current level in the Senate, the federal DREAM Act doesn’t have a chance of being passed, let alone being signed into law. Opposition to the act runs deep among congressional Republicans and was recently crystallized by Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) who said that the Democrats’ push for the DREAM Act “had all of the hallmarks of a cynical effort to use the hopes and dreams of these young people as a political wedge in the run-up to the 2012 election.” (Sherry).
There are some Republicans, most of them not in the House or Senate, who believe their party’s opposition to the DREAM Act is not only misguided, but a crucial mistake for a party still trying to attract Latino voters. Conservative columnist Linda Chavez, a former White House senior staffer during Ronald Reagan’s second term, said in a December 2010 Boston Herald opinion piece that “The refusal of all but a tiny handful of Republicans to vote for the DREAM Act will become a future nightmare…It could well cost Republicans the White House in 2012 – the Democrats are betting on it.” (Chavez).
While few would argue with the position Chavez stakes out, the fear that many Republican elected officials and potential candidates have of offending the so-called Tea Party is a factor in the upcoming election cycle. Republican Senator Orrin Hatch, a co-sponsor of the act when it was originally introduced in 2001, has turned against it in recent months. Hatch skipped a December 2010 vote on the bill that he called “a cynical exercise in political charades” by the Senate’s Democratic leadership. (Roche). This non-action by Hatch came less than six months after he spoke in favor of the act at a July 7, 2010 town hall meeting in Layton, Utah. Hatch’s reversal can be directly traced to the fact that he faces a tough primary challenge from a Tea Party supported candidate in his battle for a seventh term as Roche points out.
There’s another issue that was addressed soon after the recent self-outing, if you will, of journalist Jose Antonio Vargas. Born in the Philippines and brought to America at the age of 12, Vargas writes about his situation after the most recent vote against the Act (Vargas). In this article, Vargas told about his journey to America and how he was raised by his grandparents in Northern California. However, there is one big difference between Vargas’ situation and most others brought here as minors: he had fake papers, including a green card and he knew it. As Mark Krikorian, the head of the Center for Immigration Studies and a columnist for National Review Online points out in his July 7, 2011 commentary, Vargas [wasn’t] “undocumented…he had illegal documents.” (Krikorian).
Situations such as that of Vargas are not addressed by the DREAM Act and should be addressed under current immigration law. There must be a consequence for someone like Vargas who came here under false pretenses and knowingly stayed long after reaching adulthood. And one of those consequences occurred on July 20 of this year, when the state of Washington revoked Vargas’ driver’s license because “he could not prove that he lived in the state when he obtained it, as required by law.” (Turnbull).
It is believed that there are approximately 825,000 who would meet all of the requirements set out in the Dream Act (Kollipara). If that number is even remotely close to being accurate, that’s a lot of potential doctors, lawyers, teachers, police officers, accountants, or any number of other careers that could lead to solid, tax-paying, family-raising legal residents. And, when you take a good hard look at the situation, isn’t that what it’s all about? Strengthening America through good, productive, law-abiding people is a positive thing, After all, we can’t deport everybody who came here illegally, can we?
Today, even with its myriad of problems and issues that divide us along political ideology and alliances, America remains the proverbial “shining city on a hill” to many around the world. The prevailing belief for so many who dream of a better life for themselves and their families is that with hard work, education, and a bit of luck, one can accomplish almost anything in this country stands as a monument to America’s greatness.
When it’s all said and done, the DREAM Act, while not perfect – no legislation is – remains the best vehicle for addressing a very serious problem and Congress should pass the bill and allow the president to sign it into law without any further delay.