Send DREAM Back to the Drawing Board

December 2nd, 2010 at 11:15 am David Frum | 37 Comments |

| Print

Do you remember the scene in Annie Hall where the characters are arguing about Marshall McLuhan. Then Woody Allen pulls McLuhan from behind a curtain and announces: “I have him right here”?

I feel a little that way this morning about my online debate with Will Wilkinson about the proposed DREAM law. So there I am yesterday, halfway through a lengthy debunking of Wilkinson’s cheery reassurances about the DREAM act when … but I’ll let Politico tell the story from here.

Senate Democrats have introduced their fifth version of the DREAM Act this year in a bid to tackle concerns from critics and win support from a handful of moderate lawmakers from both parties.

Sure looks like the authors of the bill agree with me, not Wilkinson, about what the previous versions of the law would have done.

The latest version, filed by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) late Tuesday night, would bar illegal immigrants from receiving in-state college tuition; drops the age of eligibility to 29 from 34; would not grant permanent legal status to anyone for at least 10 years; would restrict eligibility for those who commit certain misdemeanor crimes; and would limit individuals from being able to sponsor family members for U.S. citizenship, among other changes.

Those who receive conditional legal status under the DREAM Act also would be ineligible for Medicaid, food stamps and other government-funded benefits.

In other words: yes it was true (sorry Will!) that previous versions of the DREAM act offered amnesty to the illegal immigrant parents of DREAM beneficiaries. Yes it was true (sorry again!) that the bill offered large subsidies to people currently present in the country illegally. Yes it was true (sorry once more!) that the legal language about “good character” didn’t mean very much. And yes it was true (sorry a fourth time!) that the bill potentially applied to many more people than the 60,000 or so Wilkinson mentioned in his very first post.

The good news is that the fixes offered by the Democrats constitute a genuine improvement in the law that address the concerns whose reality Wilkinson was denying just the day before yesterday. And with a few more improvements, the law could be on its way to being a genuine humanitarian measure.

Here would be my three main suggestions:

1) Lower the age of entry into the US. Even the new versions of the law extend amnesty to people who entered the US up to age 16. That allows too many people who entered on their own impetus rather than as part of a family group – and too many people whose first language will never be English. I’d lower to 12, to ensure we really are talking about children who have spent half or more of their lives in the US.

2) False statements in the application should be prosecutable. As written, lying on the forms is still a good one-way option: it might help, and it can’t hurt.

3) For those who choose enlistment rather than college, I’d require honorable discharge rather than 2 years service as a prerequisite for regularization. For those who choose college rather than enlistment, I’d like to see some measure- I’m not sure how to write such a rule myself – to prevent the emergence of a huge industry of fly by night institutions that will enroll (and keep enrolled) all paying customers regardless of how terribly they perform. As the law is now written, that last is an all too likely consequence.

With those changes, DREAM could be genuinely useful as part of a package of immigration reforms that should also include the following:

1) Employers should be held strictly liable for employment of illegal aliens – ie “I didn’t know” should no longer be an excuse, just as “I didn’t know” is not an excuse for violations of the clean air and clean water laws. At the same time, we should remove prison as a possible punishment and substitute tougher fines. It’s more important that punishment be certain than that it be draconian: the goal is to raise the projected cost of using illegal labor and thus incentivize the employment of legal labor instead.

2) A sense of the Congress’ resolution against a general amnesty for illegal aliens, to dispel any illusions generated by the past decade of amnesty activism. The goal again is to change the incentive structure by sending clear messages about what can be expected in future.

Recent Posts by David Frum

37 Comments so far ↓

  • Carney

    No, send DREAM to the scrap heap. We don’t NEED illegal aliens.

    The college thing is a joke. As if we’re crying out for more college graduates, so desperately that we’d be willing to overlook being an illegal alien if you’d just do us the huge favor of going to college? Our colleges are over-stuffed already with too many young people without the brains necessary to complete university-level coursework.

    The military thing is more defensible, but our military is doing OK when it comes to recruiting as is, and I’m sure there are plenty of legal aliens and overseas foreigners who’d be available and willing to take the place of the illegals in question.

    The only illegals I’d keep here are those who finger and help us find, round up, and deport the others, or who provide unique material evidence in catching other kinds of criminals, or terrorists. And I’d balance that kind of amnesty with amnesties for the coyotes and employers who, before they’re turned in, turn in a set large number of illegals to us. The idea being to destroy the informal trust networks necessary for sustained illegal activity, and to destroy the excuse that we can’t crack down on illegals without impeding other law enforcement.

  • albarran58215

    first off lets let me start by saying that i would be one of these ILLEGAL ALIENS who could benefit from something like this. I have been in this country since January of 1990 when i was just 5 years of age. i’ll be 25 years old soon and this county is all i know. i have never been arrested, i have graduated from a 4 year university with a degree in Civil Engineering, and never once received financial help from the government. as far as i’m concern i have worked hard to be a good member of society just like many other american, all i need is an opportunity to continue contributing to MY county. and I say my country because this is the only one i’v known.

    i dislike carney’s post because there are a lot of good people who deserve a chance, yes there are some bad apples and i would be the first to say they should be deported, why because unlike them i feel i have earn the right to be here by my actions.

    as far as the dream act goes with respect to military service, i have just read the bill and it states that you MUST be honorably discharged or your conditional status will be revoked. i feel they have made the bill more realistic and fair. there are still a lot of people in this great country who feel some type of ownership to the benefit of this country and a lot of THEM will say DEPORT them all, but the fact of the matter is that there are people who have worked harder, been better citizens, and value the PRIVILEGE of being in this country more then THEM, and this bill will be helping those people.

    I hope we can all understand that in in this county we all want the same things, happiness, freedom and prosperity, lets not penalize the people who work so hard to attain these values by doing the right thing every single day.

  • benjamin212

    @Carney…”Our colleges are over-stuffed already with too many young people without the brains necessary to complete university-level coursework.”….So how can the U.S. compete in the global market then? I support the Dream Act 100% because of that sentance you posted…Kids should not suffer because of there parents..period

  • Carney

    benjamin212, we can compete better in the global market by abandoning the egalitarian notion that college is for everybody. By accepting the reality that intelligence is not evenly distributed. That only a minority is capable of university-level coursework, and that everyone else should either stop at secondary education, or go on to job training, apprenticeships, junior college at most, or marry and raise the kids. In that way, our farming, mining, manufacturing, and service sectors would have more and better-prepared entrants, college would be more efficient and affordable (with far fewer students colleges would have a price war), and better able to concentrate their resources on pushing the kids with talent to be their best, rather than have them coast along.

    And kids suffer because of their parents all the time. A murderer or embezzler or repeat speeder’s kids suffer by being deprived of his company while he is in jail.

    Decisions have consequences. If you dragged your kids into America illegally, you and they should all be required to leave.

  • Derk

    For the last decade I have said I would give green cards to every foreign student upon graduating from college. Keep the best and brightest here in the U.S. Who knows who will become the next Sergey Brin – cofounder of Google. And, half the U.S. Nobel Laureates from the U.S. are foreign born. If you want a new factory for Intel here in the U.S. rather than in India, get more engineers. Same for Microsoft, Genentech, and a host of companies. These companies would in turn create jobs for everything from construction to Janitorial services. We have to remove the vitriole around race and take a cold hard look about how to create jobs here in this country. And, there is no better way to do this than get more kids through college. College graduates pay far more in taxes than they collect in benefits. It makes economic sense to endorse the Dream Act. As to David Frum’s proposals for improvement, I agree with all of them except lowering the age to 29. I would leave it at 35. I agree we want legitimate education not degree mills. I agree that they should still wait 10 years after completion. I agree these kids – now adults – should have no advantage in helping their parents obtain legal entry. I agree especially strongly with the idea that this ACT has to be separated from overall immigration reform and amnesty. Let’s keep the bright kids irrespective of their birthplace. The country wins with a sensible approach. And, this is sensible.

  • PracticalGirl

    A very practical question: Where would a law like this leave a state like California and the nine other states who have granted in-state tuition to children of illegals who have a diploma from an in-state high school and meet/exceed the admissions requirements? The California law (at least) says nothing about “state residency”, only distinguishes who they consider an in-state student.

  • Carney

    Derk, how many of those success stories were illegal aliens? And all of your handful of names have sky-high IQs, which can be determined via IQ tests, or tests that are heavily correlated with IQ such as the SAT and GRE.

    There are almost zero high IQ people in the US who are not going to college or who did not go. This is a non-existent problem.

    And just pushing more warm bodies into college does nobody any good. Average, (IQ 100), or below average kids will not turn into Andy Grove overnight by being sent to a university – they just don’t have the mental capacity.

    As for the tiny handful of illegal aliens who have high enough IQ’s to be good college students, let’s make up for their loss by re-configuring our immigration policies so as to emphasize high IQ, as well as ease of assimilation and Americanization. And reconfiguring other policies that affect our demographic future as well, to help prevent an “Idiocracy” future.

    What DREAM really is is the camel’s nose under the tent, a mini amnesty using the most sympathetic seeming illegals, that can be expanded and expanded until we have a full amnesty (again) and effectively, open borders – unlimited endless overwhelming waves of any foreigners who want to barge their way in here, and completely reshape our country regardless of what those of us who are citizens actually want.

  • PracticalGirl


    “benjamin212, we can compete better in the global market by abandoning the egalitarian notion that college is for everybody.”

    There’s validity in that statement, in that many high school diplomates would benefit from some sort of professional/trade training rather than college. But benjamin212 is talking about highly qualified students. What’s wrong with taking advantage of what’s here for busines advancement on the national and global scale?

  • benjamin212

    @Carney..Oh we can compete? So where does American rank in the world when it comes to Math, reading and Science??…We should give the dream students a chance..That new version is tougher but i know the Dream students still want the chance..

  • PracticalGirl

    Carney, carney, carney…The IQ thing? It’s bogus. There is NO IQ test that can predict success in a post-secondary environment. Just ask Steve Jobs or Larry Ellison or Albert Einstein et al about that. Conversely, it is also true that success in college is had by many a student who struggled in a high school setting and (the three mentioned already plus a truckload more) many a failed student who have become wildly successful in business. What’s your point?

    If you have good hard science that supports your position, please post the links.

  • benjamin212

    Mayor Bloomberg, Rupert Murdoch, Bill Gates, The Pentagon all want the Dream Act passed because they know how important it is to our future and you “Carney” think they are wrong????

  • Robin5K

    albarran, you make some very good points, but the fact remains that coming to and staying in the United States is not a civil right. The onus for the predicament that you find yourself in is not upon the United States or the American people. It’s on your parents. Certainly it must have gone through their minds when they brought you here what your long-term prospects were going to be as an illegal resident here. Have you asked them that question–what did they expect was going to happen to you as an adult, or did they just assume that if they, and you, could wait it out long enough, that the US would give in and grant you legality? What did they think was going to happen after you got your degree in engineering? That you could practice illegally in an engineering firm? I doubt that. What were you expecting when you decided to major in civil engineering? You say you don’t want to return to your country of birth and you know you can’t work legally here, so what were you expecting? A means to get legal, I presume. What other prospects are there. Pretty big gamble. Believe me, I feel for you. But I, and the rest of the American people are not responsible for your parents’ decision some 20 years ago. It was a huge gamble they made, and it may not turn out the way they and you have probably been banking on all along. Sorry. Good luck.

  • Carney

    PracticalGirl, IQ is not only highly correlated with both academic and real-world success, it is significantly better correlated with it than grades or socio-economic background. The science on that is so overwhelming I hardly know where to start. What evidence do you have that the three men you named have or had low IQs?

    And yes, benjamin, I do. Above a certain wealth level, businessmen tend to become very politically correct to fend off resentful backlash, and to compete with each other for social prestige. As for the Pentagon, it may want more soldiers, or its civilian leadership and military top brass (screened and groomed by the Senate Armed Services Committee staff for Political Correctness) may simply being PC.

  • Sadpragmatist

    While I appreciate a substantive post with actual policy ideas – I do take umbrage with the thought that the Democrats altering a bill shows anything other than their complete lack of spine to any slight criticism.

    After all these are the same politicians who removed a perfectly acceptable Medicare benefit which would cover doctor’s time for end of life counseling. An abandoned item which was originally proposed by Republicans and not only empowered the individual but also had a real chance of reducing healthcare costs because a bunch of clowns labeled it a ‘Death Panel.’

    More to the point though – in addition to the idea of ‘strict liability’ for employers verifying legal status, which I agree with, I think prison should still be on the table for the 2nd or 3rd offense. Also I would love to see a variant “DREAM Act” where an illegal immigrant can be put on a fast track to consideration for legal status *if* they turn in an American who is illegally employing them and said employer is successfully convicted.

  • sweatyb

    The only way to rid this country of illegal immigrants is to destroy the prosperity that attracts them. The science on that is so overwhelming I hardly know where to start. Clearly, we must do everything in our power to ruin ourselves: raise the unemployment level, increase the disparity between the ultra-rich and everyone else, reduce the effectiveness of our schools and hinder the development of the young. Only then will we be free of the scourge of these hard-working, low-cost laborers and their savory food!

    Only an imbecile would disagree with me. The same kind of imbecile who wouldn’t realize that Rupert Murdoch is absolutely consumed with a desire to be loved by liberals and so devotes himself tirelessly to spouting politically correct platitudes.

  • Carney

    Sadpragmatist, I agree with the suggestion in your last sentence – I forgot to add that idea to my first post’s last paragraph.

  • Carney

    sweatyb, we’ve been far wealthier than Mexico and points south for our entire existence, and yet illegal immigration has only been a serious problem in the last few decades. So the problem is not our wealth, it’s our loss of will to defend our borders, or, rather, the loss of will among our elites to do so.

    And illegals’ “cheap labor” isn’t so cheap – the other costs, in the form of disease, welfare, crime, education, job losses among Americans, and the damage to national cohesion, identity, and unity, by far outweigh whatever “benefits” it provides. Interesting how liberals who go on and on about the “externalities” of pollution costs, for instance, are blind to the externalities here.

  • Brittanicus

    The Migration Policy Institute estimates that 2.1 million illegal aliens could be immediately eligible for legalization should the DREAM Act pass into law.

    Not one of these bills has been reviewed by the Judiciary Committee, nor have Senators been provided with a (CBO) Congressional Budget Office score. This Sly game makes it nearly impossible for members of this body, and their constituents, to properly review and consider the legislation prior to a vote. It is an abuse of the process and on that basis alone members ought to oppose cloture. Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) contacted the Congressional Budget Office today requesting a score of either the House version of the DREAM Act (H.R.1751) or the most recent Senate version (S.3992). Sen. Vitter’s request is similar to one made last night by Ranking Member of the House Immigration Subcommittee Steve King (R-Iowa) says the DREAM Act could cost as much as $20 billion.

    Sen. Jeff Sessions letter dated Dec. 2, 2010 addressed a letter to his Senate colleagues urging them to oppose the DREAM Act.
    Sen. Sessions also discussed the weaknesses of the DREAM Act by highlighting:

    * the ability for individuals who qualify for the DREAM Act to sponsor their family members for (LPR) Lawful Permanent Resident or Legal Permanent Resident status once they (students) themselves have received LPR status;
    * individuals with criminal histories can qualify for the DREAM Act amnesty, and the Secretary of Homeland Security has the authority to waive eligibility requirements;
    * DREAM Act applicants receive an immediate stay of removal proceedings, creating a safe harbor for illegal aliens facing deportation; and
    * DREAM Act applicants don’t need to complete college or fulfill their military service in order to receive LPR status. Call your Three Members of Congress through the Capitol Hill switchboard: 202-224-3121.

  • Robin5K

    I don’t think there’s even a remote chance that the DREAM Act will pass. If it comes up for a vote, everybody knows it’s going to fail, including the Democrats, who will simply use the vote to remind Latinos next election day how the GOP really “feels” about them. If the DREAM Act comes up for a vote, when everybody knows full well it won’t pass, it’s obviously political theater and a political ploy for the Dems to ingratiate themselves further with Latinos.

  • 24AheadDotCom

    The WaPo recently had some stats about the unemployed and others being turned away from community colleges because they’re full:

    The DA – in any form – would increase competition for already scarce spots. In other words, it would allow illegal aliens to keep some Americans from going to college.

    And, depending on the version, it would allow in-state foreign citizens to get a better tuition rate than U.S. citizens from other states.

    In my chatting about this via I’ve learned that there are a few different types of people who support it: those who’d be affected (almost all Hispanic), those who are paid-off (DC hacks and immig. lawyers), and a small number of useful idiots. The latter have shown that they don’t “get” basic concepts like citizenship. For instance, I’ve asked about a dozen DA fans “an illegal alien & his U.S. citizen *identical* twin apply for one (1) college spot. Who do you give it to?” None of them have selected the U.S. citizen.

    Instead of support the DA in any form, Frum should a) try to educate those useful idiots, b) try to get the other set of useful idiots (the teapartiers) to oppose bills like this, and c) come up with an alternative plan involving a repatriation program.

  • Splenda


    I agree with you that the college requirement needs to be stricter. There are many for-profit colleges whose degrees are virtually worthless in getting a job; they simply do not have the academic rigor to teach the necessary skills. I saw an interview with the graduates of a for-profit college’s nursing department who graduated without ever stepping foot in a hospital.

    Until the Dept. of Education really begins separating the wheat from the chaff in terms of which colleges and universities are acceptable institutions to be student loan recipients, the college requirement from the DREAM act needs to be re-written. At this time, I don’t think it needs to be a requirement as much as a heavily-weighted factor. High school diploma or GED needs to be a necessity, with a college degree being judged on its area of study and where it was obtained (Engineering at Stanford? You’re in. General studies at Grand Canyon University? Wait a second — do you even have a job?). Will there be gray areas? Sure. But it is probably the only fair way to go.

  • elizajane

    David, I hated your first post on this subject but your actual suggestions are good and make sense. We need something like a DREAM act. For a country that’s really lagging in education, it makes no sense to be tossing talent out the window; likewise, it makes no sense for our all-volunteer army not to take on qualified people who grew up here and are willing to die for this country. A mechanism to keep the best and brightest here seems like a no-brainer to me; I cannot understand those (like Carney) who are so absolutist on this that they’re willing to throw out the best along with the worst.

    As for college requirements, it’s entirely true that there needs to be some sort of regulation here, as there should be something similar for student loan recipients. I can’t believe this would be very hard. THere are all sorts of serious accreditation mechanisms in place.

  • politicalfan

    “No, send DREAM to the scrap heap. We don’t NEED illegal aliens.”

    I would imagine that you are not that old. I am not sure where you are from. More or likely, you might have an illegal alien in your family (according to the attitudes of that time)! Check your state history as well. Most of us are a bunch of mutts! Unless your family is pretty new to the country. Then maybe that makes you a new American.

  • politicalfan

    Regardless if this is political theatre or not, the effort to try will make a difference. The R party has not done a good job with this group. There are also many that think the party propped up 3 hispanics in Congress to make them look good. Kind of like Michael Steele- who they want to get rid of as soon as possible. This will put a ton of pressure on those 3 hispanics to do something with immigration reform. Don’t underestimate political theatre, it will be used a ton! Watch MSNBC (Ed Show)!!! If I watched his entire program, I might just think the Republicans do not like the middle class. Ed is great at what he does!!! Political theatre=Palin. It works!!!

  • Rep. Luis Gutierrez: If Democrats can’t pass the DREAM Act now, it’s time for Latinos to break away « Hot Air

    [...] you believe this Daily Beast piece, he’s ready to walk away from the Democrats unless the new watered-down DREAM Act passes sometime in the next three weeks. Which … is a pretty darned good incentive for GOP [...]

  • albarran58215

    TO: Robin5K

    What were my parent thinking? that there could have a better life for their kids here,
    what was I thinking? i was thinking since i’m here might as well make the best of my opportunities. i decided to go to college not a s a gamble but a as an investment. i’m investing in my future. now i would love to be able to stay here and give back to this country all that it has been offered me, it has paid for my pre-college education and i’m sure subsided some of my college education. i would love to get a job and payback my dept, i’m not trying to get a “free ride here”, BUT!!! if i can’t make it in this country then, now that i have the tools for success i would not mind going back to mexico, or Canada, or some were in Europe, or any other country which will welcome me in for what benefits i could bring it, especially as an engineer. the U.S. is my first choice but its a big world out there and the U.S.’s lose is another country’s gain, in my eyes

    life is not a gamble, you have to be smart and come out ahead no matter what, thats what my parent did, thats what i did, and will do, and i guarantee its what you and your parents would have done if you were in my place.

  • Robin5K

    albarran, there’s nothing in your posts that would lead me to believe that you’re here for a “free ride.” The fact remains that regardless of how good you are and how honorable your intentions are, and I believe they are, you are simply wrong that you had a civil right to enter this country without prior permission and to stay here, no matter how well-behaved you’ve been while here. Immigrants don’t get to decide what the qualifications for citizenship are.

    And I can assure you you’re wrong about I or my parents doing the same thing if I or they were in a similar predicament as your parents. They and I know how offensive it is for others to take presumptuous liberties in a country where they’re not wanted. Knowing what I know about how Americans feel about the boldness and presumptuousness of illegals who think the only qualifications for citizenship are the physicality to cross the desert or the Rio Grande, the money to pay a coyote, the dishonesty to overstay a visa, the fraud of lying on employment applications, and the stealth to remain below the radar of ICE, and, of course, to then proclaim oneself as being “law-abiding” and self-reliant and just “looking for a better life,” I can assure you I would never want to be on the receiving end of that level of disrespect, and I would never want to have gotten my citizenship that way if it ever came to that. But, again, that’s my perspective being here on this side of the debate. I can understand how illegals can’t and don’t see it from that vantage point.

    I know it sounds otherwise, but this isn’t personal. I repeat, I think you’re a good and decent person who’s done very well for himself. But that has nothing to do with this country’s immigration policy, which is none of illegal immigrants’ business, imho. It’s the American people’s business. Sorry if any of that was offensive. Again, matters of public policy are not personal or emotional, or, rather, they shouldn’t be.

  • Mercer

    “now that i have the tools for success i would not mind going back to mexico, or Canada, or some were in Europe, or any other country which will welcome me in for what benefits i could bring it, especially as an engineer.”

    Have you applied to Canada? My understanding is that Canada favors skilled people who speak English. It has better criteria for selecting immigrants then the US in my opinion.

    The problem with the Dream Act is that probably few of the people will have demanding and marketable degrees like engineering. Anyone in the US can find a college that will admit them, no matter how poor their academic ability, if they pay the tuition. Just because someone attends a college for two years does not mean they have acquired an education that is valued in the job market.

  • CaseyA

    From a research standpoint, according to a big study done by Collier and Thomas, English Learner students in a good school became grade level proficient in four to seven years. This doesn’t mean that it takes them four years to learn English, it means that in four years they were able to read, write, and speak as well as the average English only student in their grade level. Lowering the age to 12 eliminates a huge chunk of potential college graduates. Every one of those non-graduates will be a further drain on the economy, government services, and tax revenue. At least consider pushing the age to 14.

    At 14 a kid arriving here would be starting ninth grade in a US high school. The majority of English learners who enter high school at the lowest level on the CELDT test, elevate their scores to the fourth, the highest, level by their senior year.

    I’m not sure what informed your proposal of 12 years old, except for the mathematics that it is half the age a kid would be by the time they graduate from college. Ensuring that the greatest number of students have an opportunity to get an education or serve this country makes practical sense, and picking a date and limiting the positive impact of the bill to fit a cosmetic ratio seems impractical and unwise.

    It would have a much greater impact in the affective domain of education if students entering high school had the realistic chance to go to college. The college requirements start in High School and do not extend to work done or merits earned at age 12 or 13.

    Depending on their schooling from their native country, they could either go the junior college route or complete a rigorous high school curriculum and go off to a four year University. Or after four years of US High School they would be able to pass the literacy test and join the military.

  • Carney

    politicalfan, my personal or family history doesn’t affect the reality of what is in the best interests of the United States. Nor does being an immigrant or a descendant of immigrants IN ANY WAY obligate anyone to support open borders.

  • albarran58215

    TO ROBIN 5k
    i see were your coming from and do not take it personal, i agree it is the citizens of this country who showed decide the fate of us immigrants, this is because i am a firm believer in the Constitution, and the Constitution gave the right of voting to the citizens. that is why i mentioned that if i can’t make it here i have no reason to stay here, so i would in fact be leaving. bc your right i cannot practice engineering here with my current legal status.

    i have looked into canada, and their immigration procedures, do take in skilled workers, and they rank their skilled workers by classes, such as class A, class B, class C, etc…. Class A being the most desired, if you do some research you will find that civil engineering is in class A, so canada would gladly consider me. second i have been here for 20 years and i am 110% fluent in English and Spanish, as well as some French, since i took 2 years of french in highschool. so again canada would be no problem.

    alos here is a peace article on the benifits of the dream act for the military i got of cnn. i must say i 100% agree with it.
    “Opponents of the DREAM Act call it a “sugar-coated” amnesty that rewards lawbreakers. To them, the best solution to the problem of illegal residents who are also high-achieving students with dreams of serving in the military is deportation, even though that would massively benefit their countries of birth while depriving the United States of their talents.
    Instead of wearing our uniforms, these recruits could be recruited to work for foreign governments, foreign militaries and foreign intelligence agencies. At a time when we are focused on protecting our borders and quashing threats to our national security, it seems unwise to export thousands of American-educated and American-acculturated young people to militaries other than our own.”

  • thelifela

    @albarran58215 You have to be one of the most polite proponents of amnesty that I have heard from, and I don’t make it my business to listen to illegal immigrants, no offense you surely have a name and I am guessing it’s close to Albarran, so I fully agree with your opinion but do not support it, I believe @Robin5k hit my sentiments exactly right on the head. Now I was in the US Navy, and the report from CNN is a sad travesty of our biased corporate based media, but the spirit of the people of the United States, is that we wish to build our nation from within, and there has been outrage over a lack of policy in regards to illegal immigration on a national level. Mexico itself was up until 9 months ago enforcing an immigration policy which was punishable by 3 years in Prison for 1st time offenders. We want our kids going to school without worrying about violence from the cartel, in Arizona, California, and Texas, we want our language to be used in our country that we freely vote in, we want the best and brightest as I am a student in Engineering myself. But what we don’t want is more trash, and it’s not you obviously, you make up a very small minority in the case of immigration where you are 1 of 12 Million per year, bloating programs built upon the consensus of the people, and paid for by there tax dollars.

    I certainly wouldn’t travel to the United States seeking better opportunities when Mexico is no poor nation. Entrepreneurs built the United States, and they still are our backbone. They pay taxes, they contribute job growth, and they are the pillars of our society. But when you are willing to take half the pay for a job decreasing the value of labor here in our country, when we built unions to protect our labor pool, you are just pissing off the inhabitants of the place you say is providing you your livelyhood. Our taxes pay for pregnant Mexican females under the age of 21 to be on unemployment, GA, & food stamps, when many of us are out of work who spend money locally, and contribute nationally.

    It is a travesty that we are even considering anything close to amnesty, And @ CNN” The United States Military Defense Budget is $650 Billion dollars. There is not an ounce of fear in the service members who are quite logical about use of force. I fired missiles for the US Navy, Armies abroad from Mexico to South America do not intimidate a military capable of first strike ability from anywhere in the world. I am sorry that is irrelevant to the cause of hiring illegal immigrants into the worlds finest military.

  • Not quite a teenage dream: DREAM Act likely to fail in Wednesday vote

    [...] latest version of the bill, the fifth, introduced a number of compromises in an attempt to win back support from centrists [...]

  • DADT, DREAM Act votes scheduled for today in Senate

    [...] latest version of the bill, the fifth, introduced a number of compromises in an attempt to win back support from centrists [...]

  • Last chance: DREAM Act vote coming tomorrow « Hot Air

    [...] 2012. Don’t take failure for granted, though: The House made the bill a bit more appealing by scaling back some of the crappier provisions, and the collapse of the pork-packed omnibus spending bill last [...]

  • » Blog Archive » Last chance: DREAM Act vote coming tomorrow

    [...] in 2012. Don’t take failure for granted, though: The House made the bill a bit more appealing by scaling back some of the crappier provisions, and the collapse of the pork-packed omnibus spending bill last [...]

  • Last chance: DREAM Act vote coming tomorrow | Feed News from around the World

    [...] in 2012. Don’t take failure for granted, though: The House made the bill a bit more appealing by scaling back some of the crappier provisions, and the collapse of the pork-packed omnibus spending bill last [...]