Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

DREAM ACT - INFINITY

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • DREAM ACT - INFINITY

    DREAM ACT - 2005

    Overview

    Each year, 65,000 undocumented students graduate from our nation's high schools. Brought by their parents as young children, many have grown up in the United States, attended U.S. K-12 schools, and share in our American culture and values. Some have little memory of their homeland or their native language. Like their U.S.-born peers, these individuals share the same dream of pursuing a higher education. Unfortunately, due to their immigration status, they are typically barred from many of the opportunities that currently make a college education affordable – in-state tuition rates, state and federal grants and loans, private scholarships, and the ability to work legally to earn their way through college. In effect, through no act of their own, they are denied the opportunity to share in the "American Dream."

    If passed, the "Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act," S. 2075, a bipartisan federal proposal led by Senators Richard Durbin (D-IL), Chuck Hagel (R-NE), and Richard Lugar (R-IN), would facilitate access to postsecondary educational opportunities for immigrant students in the United States who currently face barriers in pursuing a college education. The "DREAM Act" would also allow hardworking immigrant youth who have long resided in the U.S. the chance to adjust their status, enabling them to contribute fully to our society.

    The "DREAM Act" was introduced in the U.S. Senate in November 2005. Senator Richard Durbin (D-IL) is the sponsor of the bill, and the lead Republican cosponsors are Senators Chuck Hagel (R-NE) and Richard Lugar (R-IN). The Senate Judiciary Committee must now consider and approve the "DREAM Act" before the bill can be considered for a vote by the full Senate. Similar versions of this bill garnered significant support from both Democrats and Republicans last Congress when it was approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee with a 16-3 bipartisan vote. In addition, last year, 48 senators and 153 representatives signed on in support of the "DREAM Act" and its companion bill in the U.S. House of Representatives. The House version of the "DREAM Act", which has been championed by Representatives Chris Cannon (R-UT), Howard Berman (D-CA), and Lucille Roybal-Allard (D-CA), currently awaits reintroduction.

    __________



    Dream Act - 2003

    Immigrants' Rights Update, Vol. 17, No. 5, September 4, 2003

    A new version of the bipartisan DREAM Act, which addresses the tragedy of young people who grew up in the United States and have graduated from U.S. high schools but whose future is circumscribed by current immigration laws, has been introduced in the Senate by Senators Orrin Hatch (R-UT) and Richard Durbin (D-IL). Under current law, these young people generally derive their immigration status solely from their parents, and when the parents are undocumented or in immigration limbo, their children have no mechanism to obtain legal residency. The Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act (S. 1545), introduced on July 31, 2003, provides such a mechanism for those who are able to meet certain conditions.

    The leading bill in the House addressing the same issue is HR 1684 (Cannon, R-UT), known as the Student Adjustment Act. HR 1684 was introduced this spring and currently has 66 cosponsors from both parties.

    Like last year's version of the DREAM Act, which was also sponsored by Sen. Hatch, S. 1545 would enact two major changes in current law:

    Eliminate the federal provision that discourages states from providing in-state tuition without regard to immigration status; and
    Permit some immigrant students who have grown up in the U.S. to apply for legal status.
    But S. 1545 differs in some important respects from its predecessor.

    Unlike last year's bill, DREAM 2003 sets up a two-stage process for applying for legal status. Immigrant students who have grown up in the U.S., graduated from high school here, and can demonstrate good moral character would initially qualify for "conditional lawful permanent resident" status, which would normally last for six years. During the conditional period, the immigrant would be required to go to college, join the military, or work a significant number of hours of community service. At the end of the conditional period, those who meet at least one of these requirements would be eligible for regular lawful permanent resident status.

    If enacted, DREAM 2003 would have a life-changing impact on the students who qualify, dramatically increasing their average future earnings-and, consequently, the amount of taxes they would pay-while significantly reducing criminal justice and social services costs to taxpayers.

    Advocates believe that S. 1545 has a reasonable chance of passage in this session of Congress, in large part because Senators Hatch and Durbin were willing to bridge the bitter partisan divisions that have plagued the Senate this year. The bill already has 15 cosponsors representing a wide swath of the political spectrum; others are expected to announce their support now that Congress has reconvened after its summer break.

    The following are some of the key features of DREAM 2003:

    Restore State Option to Provide In-State Tuition Benefit. DREAM 2003 would repeal section 505 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA), which discourages states from providing in-state tuition or other higher education benefits without regard to immigration status.

    Who Qualifies for Legal Residency. Under DREAM 2003, most students of good moral character who came to the U.S. before they were sixteen years old and at least five years before the date of the bill's enactment would qualify for conditional permanent resident status upon acceptance to college, graduation from high school, or being awarded a general equivalency diploma (GED). Students would not qualify for this relief if they had committed crimes, were a security risk, or were inadmissible or removable on certain other grounds.

    Conditional Permanent Resident Status. Qualifying students would be granted conditional permanent resident status, which would be similar to lawful permanent resident status, except that it would be awarded for a limited period of time-6 years, under normal circumstances-instead of for an indefinite one. Students with conditional permanent resident status would be able to work, drive, go to school, and otherwise participate normally in day-to-day activities on the same terms as other Americans, except that they would not be able to travel abroad for lengthy periods. Time spent by young people in conditional permanent resident status would count towards the residency requirements for naturalization to U.S. citizenship.

    Requirements to Lift the Condition and Obtain Regular Lawful Permanent Resident Status. At the end of the conditional period, regular lawful permanent resident status would be granted if, during the conditional period, the immigrant had maintained good moral character, avoided lengthy trips abroad, and met at least one of the following three criteria:

    1. Graduated from a 2-year college or a vocational college that meets certain criteria, or studied for at least 2 years towards a bachelor's or a higher degree; or
    2. Served in the U.S. armed forces for at least 2 years; or
    3. Performed at least 910 hours of volunteer community service.

    The 6-year time period for meeting these requirements would be extendable upon a showing of good cause, and the Dept. of Homeland Security would be empowered to waive the requirements altogether if compelling reasons such as disability prevented their completion and if removal of the student would result in exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to the student, or to the student's spouse, parent or child

  • #2
    DREAM ACT - 2005

    Overview

    Each year, 65,000 undocumented students graduate from our nation's high schools. Brought by their parents as young children, many have grown up in the United States, attended U.S. K-12 schools, and share in our American culture and values. Some have little memory of their homeland or their native language. Like their U.S.-born peers, these individuals share the same dream of pursuing a higher education. Unfortunately, due to their immigration status, they are typically barred from many of the opportunities that currently make a college education affordable – in-state tuition rates, state and federal grants and loans, private scholarships, and the ability to work legally to earn their way through college. In effect, through no act of their own, they are denied the opportunity to share in the "American Dream."

    If passed, the "Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act," S. 2075, a bipartisan federal proposal led by Senators Richard Durbin (D-IL), Chuck Hagel (R-NE), and Richard Lugar (R-IN), would facilitate access to postsecondary educational opportunities for immigrant students in the United States who currently face barriers in pursuing a college education. The "DREAM Act" would also allow hardworking immigrant youth who have long resided in the U.S. the chance to adjust their status, enabling them to contribute fully to our society.

    The "DREAM Act" was introduced in the U.S. Senate in November 2005. Senator Richard Durbin (D-IL) is the sponsor of the bill, and the lead Republican cosponsors are Senators Chuck Hagel (R-NE) and Richard Lugar (R-IN). The Senate Judiciary Committee must now consider and approve the "DREAM Act" before the bill can be considered for a vote by the full Senate. Similar versions of this bill garnered significant support from both Democrats and Republicans last Congress when it was approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee with a 16-3 bipartisan vote. In addition, last year, 48 senators and 153 representatives signed on in support of the "DREAM Act" and its companion bill in the U.S. House of Representatives. The House version of the "DREAM Act", which has been championed by Representatives Chris Cannon (R-UT), Howard Berman (D-CA), and Lucille Roybal-Allard (D-CA), currently awaits reintroduction.

    __________



    Dream Act - 2003

    Immigrants' Rights Update, Vol. 17, No. 5, September 4, 2003

    A new version of the bipartisan DREAM Act, which addresses the tragedy of young people who grew up in the United States and have graduated from U.S. high schools but whose future is circumscribed by current immigration laws, has been introduced in the Senate by Senators Orrin Hatch (R-UT) and Richard Durbin (D-IL). Under current law, these young people generally derive their immigration status solely from their parents, and when the parents are undocumented or in immigration limbo, their children have no mechanism to obtain legal residency. The Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act (S. 1545), introduced on July 31, 2003, provides such a mechanism for those who are able to meet certain conditions.

    The leading bill in the House addressing the same issue is HR 1684 (Cannon, R-UT), known as the Student Adjustment Act. HR 1684 was introduced this spring and currently has 66 cosponsors from both parties.

    Like last year's version of the DREAM Act, which was also sponsored by Sen. Hatch, S. 1545 would enact two major changes in current law:

    Eliminate the federal provision that discourages states from providing in-state tuition without regard to immigration status; and
    Permit some immigrant students who have grown up in the U.S. to apply for legal status.
    But S. 1545 differs in some important respects from its predecessor.

    Unlike last year's bill, DREAM 2003 sets up a two-stage process for applying for legal status. Immigrant students who have grown up in the U.S., graduated from high school here, and can demonstrate good moral character would initially qualify for "conditional lawful permanent resident" status, which would normally last for six years. During the conditional period, the immigrant would be required to go to college, join the military, or work a significant number of hours of community service. At the end of the conditional period, those who meet at least one of these requirements would be eligible for regular lawful permanent resident status.

    If enacted, DREAM 2003 would have a life-changing impact on the students who qualify, dramatically increasing their average future earnings-and, consequently, the amount of taxes they would pay-while significantly reducing criminal justice and social services costs to taxpayers.

    Advocates believe that S. 1545 has a reasonable chance of passage in this session of Congress, in large part because Senators Hatch and Durbin were willing to bridge the bitter partisan divisions that have plagued the Senate this year. The bill already has 15 cosponsors representing a wide swath of the political spectrum; others are expected to announce their support now that Congress has reconvened after its summer break.

    The following are some of the key features of DREAM 2003:

    Restore State Option to Provide In-State Tuition Benefit. DREAM 2003 would repeal section 505 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA), which discourages states from providing in-state tuition or other higher education benefits without regard to immigration status.

    Who Qualifies for Legal Residency. Under DREAM 2003, most students of good moral character who came to the U.S. before they were sixteen years old and at least five years before the date of the bill's enactment would qualify for conditional permanent resident status upon acceptance to college, graduation from high school, or being awarded a general equivalency diploma (GED). Students would not qualify for this relief if they had committed crimes, were a security risk, or were inadmissible or removable on certain other grounds.

    Conditional Permanent Resident Status. Qualifying students would be granted conditional permanent resident status, which would be similar to lawful permanent resident status, except that it would be awarded for a limited period of time-6 years, under normal circumstances-instead of for an indefinite one. Students with conditional permanent resident status would be able to work, drive, go to school, and otherwise participate normally in day-to-day activities on the same terms as other Americans, except that they would not be able to travel abroad for lengthy periods. Time spent by young people in conditional permanent resident status would count towards the residency requirements for naturalization to U.S. citizenship.

    Requirements to Lift the Condition and Obtain Regular Lawful Permanent Resident Status. At the end of the conditional period, regular lawful permanent resident status would be granted if, during the conditional period, the immigrant had maintained good moral character, avoided lengthy trips abroad, and met at least one of the following three criteria:

    1. Graduated from a 2-year college or a vocational college that meets certain criteria, or studied for at least 2 years towards a bachelor's or a higher degree; or
    2. Served in the U.S. armed forces for at least 2 years; or
    3. Performed at least 910 hours of volunteer community service.

    The 6-year time period for meeting these requirements would be extendable upon a showing of good cause, and the Dept. of Homeland Security would be empowered to waive the requirements altogether if compelling reasons such as disability prevented their completion and if removal of the student would result in exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to the student, or to the student's spouse, parent or child

    Comment


    • #3
      immortale- what's the deal with the dream act?..any chance of it getting attached to a guessworker program immigration bill if one is passed soon?

      Comment


      • #4
        Dream on..

        Comment


        • #5
          Dream Act is America's first step towards dissolving the nation as a hypocrite. America sends our men and women to die for the sake of "humanity", yet there are so many inhume things going on in its own ground. I can understand the issue of a guest-worker program from both side, but the Dream Act is what defies what our nation stands for. Because of the way the d u m b a s s republicans have phucked up their reputation, they will have to give in to a liberal immigration reform. Or else the new Democratic president will. Go Hillary.

          Comment


          • #6
            Are you always so inarticulate, antivirus?

            A person who can't articulate their thoughts without resorting to bad language...well, you know what I think.

            Comment


            • #7
              SunDevil, you have to understand I am one of those who will be helped by the Dream Act. It just blows me away, that this country would have such a huge flaw. I have lived here for 16+ years, have gone to prom, football games, gone to rallies, etc. Done things because this is the only way I understand life, which is being an American. You wouldnt know it, but this issue has been the number one priority on my list, it is number one on my list when i pray. Americans dont realize it because most people take it for granted. Ask a handycap person what about how they feel when they see people running or walking? its very similar.

              Comment


              • #8
                Just where does antivirus get the idea that DEMOCRATS can or will get a guest worker program through?

                The main reason they might try is that they think it'll get them votes; but they'll have to balance this with the fact that immigration, particularly of low skilled workers, is counter to the well-being and interest of low and middle class workers. The "liberals" you might see trying for amnesty are the wealthy elites--movie stars, Ted Kennedy, the media, and the like. Moderate Democrats like me won't support it, and suspect there are more moderate Democrats than liberal these days.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I think that a guest worker program is split down the middle, but there is no question about the fact that the Dream Act is the right thing to do. As Americans we said that people in Nazi Germany, or Kosovo, or regions of Africa should not die because they were born in the worng place. Why should kids of parents who made a wrong decision should have to pay?

                  AliBA this perticular post are about the Dream Act not a guest worker program. Try to read the title of the post and try to say something that is related to the discussion.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    i support the dream act because there are millions of kids that lived in the U.S since they were little babies or teen because their parent decided to bring them into this country..They should not be penalize because of their parents act..Those kids speak perfect english with no accent just like a true blood american citizen: when you talk to them, you would not even realize that they are in the country with no legal status and they cant work, cant go to college or do anything.

                    Some of those kids are perfect A+ student, or your local high school basket,football,baseball stars etc etc..i think america owe it to them to at least help them keep their dream going and not end it abrutly like that

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      excuse me, but why not help American kids with college? American kids cannot get in-state tuition if their parents are transferred to another state (like military folks), so why should we be giving illegal aliens something American citizens cannot get? (which, by the way, is a direct violation of our Constitution!) -- send 'em back home (illegals) and give benefits to American college kids.
                      DREAM Act....a bad dream.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        you're not helping them with college, you are giving them a chance to keep their dream going, it's not like the dream act will pay for their college tuition and all, it will just give them the opportunity to possible continue their education.
                        Those kids are very well-spoken in the english language and a lot of them been living in this country since they were babies so america is the only country they've known.
                        Sending them back to a country they barely know and probably dont even talk the native language of this country, will be very immoral.

                        The main problem americans have with immigrants, illegal or not, is that once they come to this country, they refuses to adjust to the american life style and dont want to speak english or they speak very bad heavy accent english that you can not understand; now those kids that will be benefitted by the dream act are already americans and always lived an american life style so you wont need to worry about them contributing to america since they are like americans.

                        Also, the U.S Millitary will be the major winner if a bill like the dream act passes. the reason for that is that recruitment is down which is a major problem for the army. A lot of those kids that are being recruited come from the very poor neighborhoods and a lot of those kids that the army would wish to recruit dont have legal status, thus making them not qualified to sign for for the military even when a lot of them would wish to join.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I've no problem with the Dream Act and hope it does passed. Can't blame the children if their parents are dead beats or immoral. My problem is if these children will then sponsor their illegal parents, who're responsible for this mess to begin with. Unless this is forbidden, then the govt will just open another loophole in the system. Also, their legalization shouldn't take priority over the current immigration queue. Otherwise it won't be fair at all.

                          As with regard to financial aid for colleges & university, the moment they become legal they'll be treated just like any other LPR & USC, so Someone12 does have a valid point. USC should've priorities for grant, but don't restrict loan and the likes since they've to pay it back anyway.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Albatross--You should try reading some posts on the DREAM site on another website. By no means all of these kids are "Americans" or even care to be for any other reason than the economic advantages. Furthermore, I see a real difference in someone who is brought here as a child, especially an infant, and someone who came here as a teen. In their home countries, many of these "children" are considered adults at 13 or 14, and treated as such (marriage, jobs).

                            I agree with Marmaduk's point about prohibiting them from sponsoring relatives, but you can bet that would eventually get ignored or contested legally.

                            As it is, illegal aliens can go to college--if they can pay for it. The issues in the DREAM Act are enabling them to get federal funding to pay for it, and the ability to work after getting a degree. Financial aid to students, including backing for student loans is being cut in the current budget. If these kids want money for college, perhaps Mexico and other countries should provide scholarships for citizens of their countries to study here. Or back there.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              The Dream Act will give the kids 6 years of conditional green card, after that they will get a regular green card, then after 5 years of regular green card they can get a citizenship, the citizenship process will take about a year, then they will file for parents which will take another 5 years. So we are looking at 17 years before a kid is able to bring their parents here. The fact of the matter is that the parent is probably living here illegally. Give someone in their household legal status will allow them to bring a good income or legal income, and take some burden off the goverment welfare.

                              Not everyone under the Dream Act wants to go to college. They just want a place to call home. If anything, not passing the Dream Act is un-constitutional.

                              Comment

                              Sorry, you are not authorized to view this page

                              Home Page

                              Immigration Daily

                              Archives

                              Processing times

                              Immigration forms

                              Discussion board

                              Resources

                              Blogs

                              Twitter feed

                              Immigrant Nation

                              Attorney2Attorney

                              CLE Workshops

                              Immigration books

                              Advertise on ILW

                              EB-5

                              移民日报

                              About ILW.COM

                              Connect to us

                              Questions/Comments

                              SUBSCRIBE

                              Immigration Daily



                              Working...
                              X