The American DREAM Act is legislation and a proposal that is first introduced in Senate in 2001 by Orrin Hatch and Dick Durbin (Welner & Wendy, 43). The bill will therefore, provide a conditional and permanent residency to some undocumented residents with good morals or characters graduating from the U.S. schools, arrived in United States as the minors, and also lived in the country continuously for the last 5 years prior enactment of the bill.
The federal level DREAM Act legislation is always more about the immigration reforms than all about the educational reforms. The proposed legislation’s key implication is the providing undocumented students with a pathway in gaining legal status in the U.S. state level legislation, further it is not meant as larger immigration reform, even though the two issues are undoubtedly linked (Pearce & Clifford & Reena, 85). The federal level DREAM Act is meant to be fostering equality of the educational opportunities and access.
The federal DREAM Act legislation looks forward to amending the IIRIRA, which denies the individual states power in determining eligibility and requirements for the in-state tuition. According to the IIRIRA, states are not prohibited from charging immigrants who are undocumented in the state tuition; these requires all students in the country U.S. to receive in-state tuition that is offered to the undocumented students. The fundamental difference witnessed between the state and federal DREAM Act legislation is that, federal legislation gives a path to the legal status. Even though, the state level legislation of students should promise students of legal status, it is only in the federal level DREAM Act that will provide students who qualify with legal status. The federal component policy is particularly necessary in making access to the higher education meaningful. Therefore, it is this piece of immigration status of legislation that helps the students to actively make use of their degrees within United States economy. When the DREAM Act is not passed at the federal level, most of the students in the other states might access higher education in the U.S., nevertheless; the students will never have or access tangible post secondary work rewards. As articulated by Fischer (2004), without citizenship pathway offered by DREAM Act, the students who are undocumented even if someone has a college degree, may be demoted to work in the underground economy.
In addition to that, the state level DREAM Act legislation has no power granting the undocumented students federal aid on their finances. The undocumented students were denied the financial aid by the personal responsibility and the work opportunity reconciliation Act (PRWORA). Even though the state levels DREAM Act legislation has been a positive move for many of the undocumented immigrants which were affected by the legislation. It has been evident that with no solution to issue, the undocumented students will also continue to hold back from the capability to contribution and participation in the U.S to their maximum potential.Want an expert to write a paper for you Talk to an operator now
As much as the opponents trust and believed otherwise, legislation will not allow the immigrants to acquire U.S. citizenship. Instead, the latest version of DREAM Act was introduced on November and would always give conditional and permanent resident and status to undocumented immigrants who always satisfy a number of the stringent requirements. Among them are the ones who entered the U.S with the Age of under 30, and be of better moral character that either admitted to colleges or high school diploma or GED. The immigrants who always obtain restricted status that bars them from some federal grants as well travelling abroad for a long period which applies for a permanent status that complete a two years bachelor’s degree program or they serve in the U.S military for the same number of years.
It was at the national level that the DREAM Act required the immigrant’s students who are undocumented to reach or meet a certain number of requirements (Hopson & Carol & Yeakey, 62). This included; they should be brought in U.S. before they are 16 years old, and having lived for at least five years or more in the U.S. Moreover, they must have passed a comprehensive background check for criminals. Furthermore, the immigrant’s youths should demonstrate the English proficiency, possess a certificate of high school diploma or the GED, and also complete two years military service or higher education in good standing.
The much DREAM Act text was made as a part of the several other bills on immigration that failed. These bills included the comprehensive and immigration Reform Act in 2006 and Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act in 2007. The past immigration failure reform efforts were largely blamed on the republicans, who from time to time rejected the immigration reform. Nevertheless, since the re-election of president Obama, even staunchest formerly of the anti-immigration conservatives seems to come on board and agree that, the house has to come up with the final solution to the issue on the DREAMERS Act and immigrants in U.S. in legalizing their status in 2013.
The DREAM Act would benefit the innocent student’s mostly the ones less than 21 years and have been staying in the U.S for the last 5 years at enactment time. The minors have their parents accompanied to U.S before 16 years thus not responsible for violation of the immigrant law. According to Plyler, these children are innocent and distinctive underclass members they are being denied a meaningful access to the education and democracy. Many potential beneficiaries of the American DREAM Act are Americans in each respect except the legal documentation. Instead of granting an amnesty to every immigrant who are illegal, the Act provides hope to the small number of the residents who traveled in the U.S. to live and will certainly remain in the U.S.
According to the recent set of reports, if bringing in illegal migrants in the U.S, children being given legal status, their access to better employment opportunities and schooling would yield to 1.4 million employment opportunities and $ 329 billion to their economy over twenty years. According to that report, of the 2.1 million illegal immigrants, 223000 consists of this eligible for the dream act will be well conditioned to finishing college, paying for college and enrolment. This would later result to higher gains of the economy.
The centre for American progress released the study which is based in Washington in conjunction with new American economy created by news corps and New York mayor Michael Bloomberg. The congress, through the centre has been under pressure to pass bills that support the grant of foreign visas to students studying mathematics, technology engineering and science not forgetting the dream act (Schildkraut, 72). According to Bloomberg this research presents its findings supporting the dream act; nevertheless it is in favor of granting visas to illegal immigrants who have served the military or attained some level of education. He further argues that the research provides a true and clear picture of the contributions of immigrants to the economy of America.
The absolute need of their presence is to positively contribute to their economy. During the introduction of dream act, it was sponsored by two partisans but recently many partisans have joined in to support the dream act. In 2010 the House of Representatives passed it with a minority of the republic. In the senate it failed with a vote of only three republican. Recently president Obama supported the bill through his authority he gave a sigh of relief to the partisans of the dream act. He created a program, ‘’deferred action for childhood arrivals’’ that offers the youthful illegal immigrants of the U.S. a two year work permits and deferred deportation, it does not offer the citizenship of the us nor legal residency.
Mitt Romney, republican dictates that he would be in support of the dream act`s current version if it was initiated before him on the contrary he advocates for legal residence of the young immigrants who have worked in the military.
Today, the advocates of the dream act are personalizing the bill in order to attract more supporters. On the senate floor Durbin narrates stories of dream act partisans and the young illegal immigrants. He clearly states how they have become out-dated thus, drawing their attention to their current situation (Leal & Stephen, 94). The dream act opponents find this persuasive. The director of researcher at the centre for immigration studies-an opponent of the dream act argues that the moral argument is of considerable interest to the residents of America nevertheless he fails to comprehend why the partisans of the dream act concentrate on the economic argument to the critics of the dream act. He further continues to wonder why the partisans would focus on the number of new and young people who are educating up to the college level would competing for jobs with the natives of America.
Durbin finds it persuasive that if someone moves to U.S. as a child it would be unrealistic to send them back to their country. Nevertheless their cause a trivial impact in the economy of the U.S their impact consists of an extremely tiny fraction which is not even measurable. According to Kelley the report offers not a new garnering strategy for the dream act support, in simple terms to be innovative with their new ways of convince the people of America its potentials.
In conclusion, the DREAM Act has enabled most need students achieve their academic and life goals. It should be embraced to allow people to study and also live and study in U.S.