DREAM Act reintroduced

[akgind]

From The Dallas Morning News:

The Legal Route
06:41 AM CDT on Friday, September 21, 2007

From abroad, a foreigner watching Washington's immigration debate this week could easily conclude that only fools choose the legal migration route.

Inside the Capitol, Congress renewed debate over the Dream Act, a measure with bipartisan support that promotes higher education, in-state tuition and potential citizenship for the children of illegal immigrants.

Outside the Capitol, a group of highly skilled legal immigrants gathered quietly, waving American flags, to express the sense of unfairness they feel about the hassles of working and studying here legally.

Thousands of foreign students and skilled workers – exactly the people we need to fill crucial job vacancies – are waiting in line, filling out forms and typically spending years going through the painstaking process of qualifying for the right to work or study here. But they face lengthy delays because of a huge backlog of applications awaiting government security and certification checks.

The same is true of highly skilled workers already here on temporary visas but whose permanent status remains in limbo. These are immigrant doctors, nurses, engineers and other foreigners whose services we need.

Since 1990, there's been an annual cap of 140,000 employment-based green cards and 65,000 temporary work visas. The cap is far short of filling our employment gap, but measures to boost the limits stalled during congressional debate this summer over comprehensive immigration reform.

Gov. Rick Perry is one of 13 governors who say this situation needs fixing. We agree.

As it stands, Congress is sending a conflicting message abroad: Take the legal route of immigration, and you are virtually assured of hassles and frustrating delays. Do it illegally, and an education might await your children.

This newspaper favors addressing the aspects of illegal immigration, including Dream Act provisions, through comprehensive reform. But in the meantime, let's not neglect those who are standing in line, waiting patiently and following the rules.

Congress needs to show the world that we reward those who immigrate legally. At a minimum, we need to stop penalizing those whose only fault is obeying the law.

[Hermione]

Originally Posted by akgind

Hermione: How do you reconcile your support for the Dream Act in its current form with your statement:

"I think EB immigrants should offer a solution that does not have the traits of an amnesty or legalization, but still helps to bring skilled and unskilled workers under the umbrella of EB immigration"

Do you imply that the burden of bringing common solutions for both legals and illegals lies solely with the legal group, while the illegals continue to promote legislation that excludes legal students through efforts like the current Dream Act?

That's actually a good question. I view the solutions for the whole immigration system, like increase in EB numbers and no quotas for H1 as permanent solutions for going forward - solutions devised to make sure less people fall through the cracks, if you will.

DREAM act or any other measures that include legalization into some special status are not long term solutions, they are short-term remedies that help with the symptoms, not the problem itself. Something like a breathing tube for someone in anaphylactic (spelling?) shock - does it treat the allergy - no, does it help people survive - yes. So, yes, I would take the tube over no-tube on any day. I also recognize that the work does not stop there. Just like it is non-sense for the doctor to lecture a person with a hole in the chest about gun safety (the altimate solution), short term remedies are sometimes needed.

I also recognize that because people are people, regardless of how good the main system is, there always be people who fall through the carcks, so ideally, a good working system would have a permanent solution that would only be used in extereme cases (read - legalization for those who blew all chances to stay legal, but are good people overall). Something like the law that allowed people who lived in the US for 10 years to apply for a green card - if they are good people, let them stay.

Thus the theory to buld a good system is the following. You must have solid bulding blocks that fit the needs of the good people and the economy. Having good opportunites for people to come to the US (and EB system is the key here) is, therefore, a must. Second, there have to be remedy who screw up in a few non-major ways, because there will be such people. And then there is the short term remedies, which would be not needed in the ideal system, but when you have a system that is totally screwed up, you may have to start with short-term solutions.

So, we've been talking about building the ideal system. But in reality the question is - what we can get out of Congress now. And that's what we can get now. Moreover, if taking the short-term remedy to one group will give you building blocks for a good system (there was an agreement if DREAM passes, SKIL bill was to be given a chance too), then it is even better. So, the short answer is - we would not be needing the DREAM act is the system was fair, but we may use it know, especially, if it helps us build a fair system in the future.

[Hermione]

Originally Posted by akgind

From The Dallas Morning News:
As it stands, Congress is sending a conflicting message abroad: Take the legal route of immigration, and you are virtually assured of hassles and frustrating delays. Do it illegally, and an education might await your children.

I do not agree with the conclusion. Do it legally, and yes, it is a lot of hassle. Do it illegally, you and your children will be treated like crap. Your children will have no future in the coutry where they grew up, and they will depend on the mercy of Congress, which is unlikely to come, and even if it comes, it could be too late, anyway. Not a whole lot of motivation to come illegally.

[akgind]

Are you saying that the words "inadmissible and deportable" are necessary to get it out of Congress? On the contrary, my impression is that it would be possible to win a few more votes in Congress if the legislation does not target undocumented students specifically.

Originally Posted by Hermione

But in reality the question is - what we can get out of Congress now. And that's what we can get now.

[Hermione]

Originally Posted by akgind

Are you saying that the words "inadmissible and deportable" are necessary to get it out of Congress? On the contrary, my impression is that it would be possible to win a few more votes in Congress if the legislation does not target undocumented students specifically.

I do not know. If people organized and targeted Congess with letters asking to inlude documented children into the DREAM act, we would have known better.

[rongha_2000]

I agree with all that but also think may be thats a kind of deterrent that these illegals need that fear nothing (cos they got nothing to lose) when they just jump over the fence.

Bottomline: There should be no reward for breaking the law. On the contrary a stern deterrent.

Why not amend the act to say that the illegal kids should benefit if and only if their parents come out in the open and be ready to get deported.

This way you benefit the kids who had no fault in all this but at the same time punish the law-breakers.

Isnt this fair? I think it is..!

Originally Posted by Hermione

Jaime,

I have an idea - why don't we look at the circumstances closely, and see what's really fair and what is not.

Both groups of children were brought by their parents. They had no way to choose, whether they come/stay legally or illegally. They could not have refused to come. So, with all fairness, it is not an achievement of the legal children that they are legal - they had nothing to do with it. Similarly, it is not the fault of the illegal children that they are illegal, because they had nothing to do with it. Both groudps did the right thing - they greaduated from high school and went to college. I would even argue that the illegal children made some striking achievements - if you think it is easy to fund your college education when your parents can't afford it, and you can only get private help because of your status, you are wrong. They are some amazing kids, those illegal students.

Next, let's look at what these children got. Legal children can go to college on F1, then can change to H1 for work. They will also eventully receive green cards after being sponsored by their parents through family-based category.

Illegal children got... none of that. They are inadmissible - that's a kiss of death in the immigration system. No F1 for them, no H1, no green card, nothing. If they exit the country, they will be barred from entry for 10 years. They can't even go to other countries to interview for a job!

If you are so keen of FAIR, how do you explain that one group got a 10-year sentence, and the other got nothing? Do you think it is fair? Now, tell me, what would your solution be.

[Hermione]

Yes, Rosa Park broke the law, too. Guess what, it was eventually rewarded as one of the greatest achievements in American history.

There are good laws, and there are bad laws. If you study the immigration law history, starting from the 1980s, there only have been deterrents, more deterrents, and then deterrents on top of deterrents. Guess what - the more deterrents you put into the law, the more illegals you get. Immigration law right now is like a restriction of 25 mph on highway and indefinite licence cancellation with possibility of reinstatement for a single moving violation. As a result, all you are geting is a bunch of people driving with no licences. So, either you have a bunch of people with no licence driving, or you must reward the lawbreakers with a reinstatement procedure - there is just no third option. The law is screwed up, that's the problem.

[rongha_2000]

Hmm.. more the deterrents more the violators, so reward the violators.. Wow..!! what a solution..!!

Mind blowing...

Originally Posted by Hermione

Yes, Rosa Park broke the law, too. Guess what, it was eventually rewarded as one of the greatest achievements in American history.

There are good laws, and there are bad laws. If you study the immigration law history, starting from the 1980s, there only have been deterrents, more deterrents, and then deterrents on top of deterrents. Guess what - the more deterrents you put into the law, the more illegals you get. Immigration law right now is like a restriction of 25 mph on highway and indefinite licence cancellation with possibility of reinstatement for a single moving violation. As a result, all you are geting is a bunch of people driving with no licences. So, either you have a bunch of people with no licence driving, or you must reward the lawbreakers with a reinstatement procedure - there is just no third option. The law is screwed up, that's the problem.

[Hermione]

rongha_2000,
First, those kids are NOT violators. They have not done anything worng.
Second, they have already have no future in this country. If that is not punishment enough in your eyes, I do not know what would be.
Third, if you have another solution, feel free to offer.

[Maverick1]

Originally Posted by Hermione

rongha_2000,
First, those kids are NOT violators. They have not done anything worng.
Second, they have already have no future in this country. If that is not punishment enough in your eyes, I do not know what would be.
Third, if you have another solution, feel free to offer.

Hermione , Appreciate your perseverance.

I agree that there may not be any thing good for children of the legal immigrants in this bill, but nothing against them either (They will be in equally bad or good position after the passage of this bill as they are today). It would have been better if they add the aged out children of the legal immigrants to this provision. We should be working in that direction. So I think it is not good enough a reason to join NumbersUSA and oppose this bill.

Most of us around here thing exactly how Lou Dobbs and other anti-immigrants think. Can't take opposing point of view. If they get the GC they don't want more H1s around. If they get the citizenship , people on H1 are third class people and shall go back to where they came from.

I am not surprised they did not start blaming you and give you RED

Why can't we treat the forum as such and try to consider different point of view ??

[rongha_2000]

I have stated it in my earlier post. I am reposting for your convenience.

"Why not amend the act to say that the illegal kids should benefit if and only if their parents come out in the open and be ready to get deported.

This way you benefit the kids who had no fault in all this but at the same time punish the law-breakers."

Originally Posted by Hermione

rongha_2000,
First, those kids are NOT violators. They have not done anything worng.
Second, they have already have no future in this country. If that is not punishment enough in your eyes, I do not know what would be.
Third, if you have another solution, feel free to offer.

[rongha_2000]

Maverick, I see that you are very new to this forum and thats why you make this statement. What we are having here is a very healthy exchange of views. Take it easy..!

Originally Posted by Maverick1

I am not surprised they did not start blaming you and give you RED

Why can't we treat the forum as such and try to consider different point of view ??

[Maverick1]

Originally Posted by rongha_2000

Maverick, I see that you are very new to this forum and thats why you make this statement. What we are having here is a very healthy exchange of views. Take it easy..!

Yes, I am newly registered, but I have been following the forum for a while.
Glad that a civil discussion can take place
I was not referring to you though, when I made those comments. It is my general observation around here. You fall in line with 80% of folks here or else you are an agent of numbersUSA. That bothers me.

There are very many provisions that are not fair. I know folks around here are very much favorable to creating a separate queue for the folks who have US master's degree. (Similar to how they did for H1). I understand why they do it, but I don't see fairness there:

1) Person A and B go to the same college. A passes out with flying colors and gets picked up by a top company in their home country. Person B gets a C, does not get a job for two years.

2) Person B gets an admission in to a C grade school in US where his father pays 100% of the tuition and expenses.

3) Person A comes to US on H1 after 4 years.

Why should person B get privileged position than person A who is smarter and has more experience than B ?

I say there are so many unfair provisions , but we don't need to go all out unless they hurt majority of us.

If I were a Person A in the above case , I don't oppose a legislation that creates a separate quota for US master degree holders as long as they don't take those numbers away from my 140K and give them preferential treatment.

There I said it

[gc_chahiye]

Originally Posted by rongha_2000

I have stated it in my earlier post. I am reposting for your convenience.

"Why not amend the act to say that the illegal kids should benefit if and only if their parents come out in the open and be ready to get deported.

This way you benefit the kids who had no fault in all this but at the same time punish the law-breakers."

Its an interesting idea, but it does break up families...

[rongha_2000]

I agree..!! But you cannot break the law and still have everything you want.. This is the kind of deterrent I am talking about. If you want to be in the US and be with family then message is "obey the law and dont jump the fence."

Originally Posted by gc_chahiye

Its an interesting idea, but it does break up families...