What do you think of the DREAM Act?

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/senate-vote-dream-act-immigration-lame-duck-congress/story?id=12136182

For those who don't feel like reading through the whole article, it would legalize illegal immigrants who came here before they turned 16 but are currently under the age of 35. In order to keep their legal status they would have to graduate high school or get a GED, then they would have to either serve at least two years in the military (currently illegal immigrants can't join the military) or they would have to finish college.

People have opinions on both sides of the fence on this one. One side says that you can't blame the child for the sins of the parents, since they had no control over being bought over here as a minor. On the other side, you have people who say that amnesty will just lead to more people trying to come here illegally and may mean less jobs for people already here.

*gets popcorn tub ready* This should be good.

I think the dream act does a lot to clean up the mess that is immigrantion... Also:

*gets popcorn tub ready* This should be good.

Pixel-Pirate

This.

I have two problems with it: One, it's the only reason Harry Reid won, and two, it's a form of amnesty.

I would rather something be done to help those who are actually waiting on a list to become citizens rather than help the people who crossed over into our borders illegally. Regardless of the child not being at fault.

Seems fair. At least you know they'll be fluent in english and contribute to the country (as long as they don't major in something useless).Mochyc

I have two problems with it: One, it's the only reason Harry Reid won, and two, it's a form of amnesty.

I would rather something be done to help those who are actually waiting on a list to become citizens rather than help the people who crossed over into our borders illegally. Regardless of the child not being at fault.

airshocker

I have two problems with it: One, it's the only reason Harry Reid won, and two, it's a form of amnesty.

I would rather something be done to help those who are actually waiting on a list to become citizens rather than help the people who crossed over into our borders illegally. Regardless of the child not being at fault.

airshocker

Really? I give Reid's victory up to his opponent being a nut job.

Of course I do. I don't understand why people believe we should send them back to a country they have no real associationwith (other than birth) from the country they have grown up in.

I'm just waiting to see what will happen if it does get passed. One thing I can say is that with the military option almost half of the newly-legalized immigrants will probably still be ineligible to enlist because of medical problems (including being overweight), having only a GED (right now the military isn't accepting GED holders unless they also have at least 15 semester hours of college), being single parents (can't join if you have children unless you're married or someone else has full custody of your kids), and more. As of right now around 75% of legal Americans aren't even eligible to enlist for those same reasons as well as for criminal records. As for the rest who would be eligible, it would be assumed that at least half of them would not want to enlist and would attempt to take the college option instead.

As a result of that, you may have the vast majority of them (the ones who were either unwilling or unable to enlist) trying to take the college option but it may not be an option if they can't afford to go to school. Which may end up resulting in the long run the ones who didn't go to college or join the military would find themselves facing deportation. With that in mind, there's an estimate that less than half of the people who would be legalized by the bill's passing wouldn't even take advantage out of fear that they would eventually be deported anyway from not doing one of the stipulations of retaining legal status. If I'm not mistaken they would have six years after the bill's passing to either complete their two years of military service or college enrollment.

I don't like it and am against amnesty. If they are illegal deport themtestfactor888

Absolutely this. ^

I support it.

[QUOTE="airshocker"]

I have two problems with it: One, it's the only reason Harry Reid won, and two, it's a form of amnesty.

I would rather something be done to help those who are actually waiting on a list to become citizens rather than help the people who crossed over into our borders illegally. Regardless of the child not being at fault.

Former_Slacker

Really? I give Reid's victory up to his opponent being a nut job.

I'm confused as to the terms. Wouldn't it make sense to make the requirement a full bachelor's degree or a full 4 year term in the military? That makes it more palatable, IMO. Also, I wasn't able to find out who would be paying for the college education. If it's fully funded by taxpayers (outside of the normal tax contribution that normal citizens receive for in-state tuition) then I think it needs to be reworked.mattbbpl

They have to get a degree to be in compliance if they take the college option if I'm not mistaken. Which means if they don't do what they're supposed to while in college and drop out they loose their legal status and can be deported. In terms of how it's going to be paid for, they have to pay for it the same way as everybody else: apply for financial aid, earn a scholarship, or take out student loans. I don't think they'll be eligible for Pell Grants but I could be wrong. If they get free money to do it then it's assumed you are eligible for the same free money. If they end up getting some privilege that we can't get then it may be a problem. I can foresee a fund being started by some pro-immigration group but I seriously doubt it will even come close to paying for it.

As for the military option, you'll have a hard time finding an enlistment contract that is less than four years today anyway. The Army is the only one that is currently giving three year enlistment contracts and that's usually for jobs like infantry, truck driving, cook, and a few others that require a short AIT (Advanced Individual Training, or their job training). So they would end up serving at least three years regardless and they can't get a security clearance without US citizenship, cutting off a couple of jobs from them until they get Naturalized. To be honest, with the way the economy is the military really doesn't need them with the amount of people enlisting already but that doesn't mean they won't accept them if they're able to meet all requirements.

I think they're trying to get it passed now because it's a good bet that the incoming Congress won't even entertain it. One thing I do know was that some people who supported the bill but were anti-military wanted there to be additional options besides college and military service to maintain legal status because they assumed that since most of the people affected wouldn't be able to afford college they would end up enlisting instead. One thing I learned is that if somebody really wants to go to college they'll find a way even if it puts them in debt later, so that argument probably doesn't hold that much weight.

[QUOTE="mattbbpl"]I'm confused as to the terms. Wouldn't it make sense to make the requirement a full bachelor's degree or a full 4 year term in the military? That makes it more palatable, IMO. Also, I wasn't able to find out who would be paying for the college education. If it's fully funded by taxpayers (outside of the normal tax contribution that normal citizens receive for in-state tuition) then I think it needs to be reworked.ad1x2

They have to get a degree to be in compliance if they take the college option if I'm not mistaken. Which means if they don't do what they're supposed to while in college and drop out they loose their legal status and can be deported. In terms of how it's going to be paid for, they have to pay for it the same way as everybody else: apply for financial aid, earn a scholarship, or take out student loans. I don't think they'll be eligible for Pell Grants but I could be wrong. If they get free money to do it then it's assumed you are eligible for the same free money. If they end up getting some privilege that we can't get then it may be a problem. I can foresee a fund being started by some pro-immigration group but I seriously doubt it will even come close to paying for it.

As for the military option, you'll have a hard time finding an enlistment contract that is less than four years today anyway. The Army is the only one that is currently giving three year enlistment contracts and that's usually for jobs like infantry, truck driving, cook, and a few others that require a short AIT (Advanced Individual Training, or their job training). So they would end up serving at least three years regardless and they can't get a security clearance without US citizenship, cutting off a couple of jobs from them until they get Naturalized. To be honest, with the way the economy is the military really doesn't need them with the amount of people enlisting already but that doesn't mean they won't accept them if they're able to meet all requirements.

I think they're trying to get it passed now because it's a good bet that the incoming Congress won't even entertain it. One thing I do know was that some people who supported the bill but were anti-military wanted there to be additional options besides college and military service to maintain legal status because they assumed that since most of the people affected wouldn't be able to afford college they would end up enlisting instead. One thing I learned is that if somebody really wants to go to college they'll find a way even if it puts them in debt later, so that argument probably doesn't hold that much weight.

[QUOTE="ad1x2"]

[QUOTE="mattbbpl"]I'm confused as to the terms. Wouldn't it make sense to make the requirement a full bachelor's degree or a full 4 year term in the military? That makes it more palatable, IMO. Also, I wasn't able to find out who would be paying for the college education. If it's fully funded by taxpayers (outside of the normal tax contribution that normal citizens receive for in-state tuition) then I think it needs to be reworked.mattbbpl

They have to get a degree to be in compliance if they take the college option if I'm not mistaken. Which means if they don't do what they're supposed to while in college and drop out they loose their legal status and can be deported. In terms of how it's going to be paid for, they have to pay for it the same way as everybody else: apply for financial aid, earn a scholarship, or take out student loans. I don't think they'll be eligible for Pell Grants but I could be wrong. If they get free money to do it then it's assumed you are eligible for the same free money. If they end up getting some privilege that we can't get then it may be a problem. I can foresee a fund being started by some pro-immigration group but I seriously doubt it will even come close to paying for it.

As for the military option, you'll have a hard time finding an enlistment contract that is less than four years today anyway. The Army is the only one that is currently giving three year enlistment contracts and that's usually for jobs like infantry, truck driving, cook, and a few others that require a short AIT (Advanced Individual Training, or their job training). So they would end up serving at least three years regardless and they can't get a security clearance without US citizenship, cutting off a couple of jobs from them until they get Naturalized. To be honest, with the way the economy is the military really doesn't need them with the amount of people enlisting already but that doesn't mean they won't accept them if they're able to meet all requirements.

I think they're trying to get it passed now because it's a good bet that the incoming Congress won't even entertain it. One thing I do know was that some people who supported the bill but were anti-military wanted there to be additional options besides college and military service to maintain legal status because they assumed that since most of the people affected wouldn't be able to afford college they would end up enlisting instead. One thing I learned is that if somebody really wants to go to college they'll find a way even if it puts them in debt later, so that argument probably doesn't hold that much weight.

I looked it over again, they only need an Associates or they have to complete two years towards a four year degree. The military option is still two years of servicebut like I said you'll have a hard time getting a two year contract today and you'll probably end up serving at least three or four years. Regardless of the length of your contract you're subject to recall in emergencies for up to eight years after the day you enter the Delayed Entry Program, or when you sign your initial contract. That means if you sign your contract today, ship to basic trainingnext June, and get out after four years you can still be recalled for an emergency until November 2018 (although the chances of being recalled are between slim and none).

Really? I give Reid's victory up to his opponent being a nut job.

Former_Slacker

This isn't debatable. Reid had an insane get out the vote campaign that saved him. Plus his promise of pushing through the DREAM Act that mobilized the hispanic vote.

[QUOTE="Former_Slacker"]

Really? I give Reid's victory up to his opponent being a nut job.

airshocker

This isn't debatable. Reid had an insane get out the vote campaign that saved him. Plus his promise of pushing through the DREAM Act that mobilized the hispanic vote.

Beg to differ. Angle's racism consolidated much of the hispanic vote in Reid's favor. That+his GOtV won it for him. Also, Angle was Bat-s*** crazy. If the 'chickens-for-check-ups' lady won the Primary,she would have beaten Reid.

[QUOTE="mattbbpl"][QUOTE="ad1x2"]

They have to get a degree to be in compliance if they take the college option if I'm not mistaken. Which means if they don't do what they're supposed to while in college and drop out they loose their legal status and can be deported. In terms of how it's going to be paid for, they have to pay for it the same way as everybody else: apply for financial aid, earn a scholarship, or take out student loans. I don't think they'll be eligible for Pell Grants but I could be wrong. If they get free money to do it then it's assumed you are eligible for the same free money. If they end up getting some privilege that we can't get then it may be a problem. I can foresee a fund being started by some pro-immigration group but I seriously doubt it will even come close to paying for it.

As for the military option, you'll have a hard time finding an enlistment contract that is less than four years today anyway. The Army is the only one that is currently giving three year enlistment contracts and that's usually for jobs like infantry, truck driving, cook, and a few others that require a short AIT (Advanced Individual Training, or their job training). So they would end up serving at least three years regardless and they can't get a security clearance without US citizenship, cutting off a couple of jobs from them until they get Naturalized. To be honest, with the way the economy is the military really doesn't need them with the amount of people enlisting already but that doesn't mean they won't accept them if they're able to meet all requirements.

I think they're trying to get it passed now because it's a good bet that the incoming Congress won't even entertain it. One thing I do know was that some people who supported the bill but were anti-military wanted there to be additional options besides college and military service to maintain legal status because they assumed that since most of the people affected wouldn't be able to afford college they would end up enlisting instead. One thing I learned is that if somebody really wants to go to college they'll find a way even if it puts them in debt later, so that argument probably doesn't hold that much weight.

ad1x2

I looked it over again, they only need an Associates or they have to complete two years towards a four year degree. The military option is still two years of servicebut like I said you'll have a hard time getting a two year contract today and you'll probably end up serving at least three or four years. Regardless of the length of your contract you're subject to recall in emergencies for up to eight years after the day you enter the Delayed Entry Program, or when you sign your initial contract. That means if you sign your contract today, ship to basic trainingnext June, and get out after four years you can still be recalled for an emergency until November 2018 (although the chances of being recalled are between slim and none).

[QUOTE="airshocker"]

[QUOTE="Former_Slacker"]

Really? I give Reid's victory up to his opponent being a nut job.

Ultimas_Blade

This isn't debatable. Reid had an insane get out the vote campaign that saved him. Plus his promise of pushing through the DREAM Act that mobilized the hispanic vote.

Beg to differ. Angle's racism consolidated much of the hispanic vote in Reid's favor. That+his GOtV won it for him. Also, Angle was Bat-s*** crazy. If the 'chickens-for-check-ups' lady won the Primary,she would have beaten Reid.

You could be right though on Angle's racism pushing Hispanic's over to Reid. I can't debate that I just feel that it was that vote in particular that really pushed Reid over the top. If not for them its quite possible Angle would have won

Beg to differ. Angle's racism consolidated much of the hispanic vote in Reid's favor. That+his GOtV won it for him. Also, Angle was Bat-s*** crazy. If the 'chickens-for-check-ups' lady won the Primary,she would have beaten Reid.

Ultimas_Blade

Angle wasn't racist. Unless not believing in amnesty and believing you should take care of citizens before illegals is considered racist.

Reid only won because of his get out the vote effort and because of his promise to hispanics. That's it.

For those who don't feel like reading through the whole article, it would legalize illegal immigrants who came here before they turned 16 but are currently under the age of 35. In order to keep their legal status they would have to graduate high school or get a GED, then they would have to either serve at least two years in the military (currently illegal immigrants can't join the military) or they would have to finish college.

ad1x2

That seems like a reasonable compromise to me.

[QUOTE="Ultimas_Blade"]

Beg to differ. Angle's racism consolidated much of the hispanic vote in Reid's favor. That+his GOtV won it for him. Also, Angle was Bat-s*** crazy. If the 'chickens-for-check-ups' lady won the Primary,she would have beaten Reid.

airshocker

Angle wasn't racist. Unless not believing in amnesty and believing you should take care of citizens before illegals is considered racist.

Reid only won because of his get out the vote effort and because of his promise to hispanics. That's it.

If you didn't think her campaign's commercials were racist then you need to recalibrate your definition of racism. Reid had already set the Dream Act and other initiatives in motion before the camaign was in full swing. These initiatives weren't for the exclusive benefit of Hispanics, also for citizens of hispanic heritage immigrantion wasn't even in their top 3 priorities as far as the issues according to exit polls.

If you didn't think her campaign's commercials were racist then you need to recalibrate your definition of racism. Reid had already set the Dream Act and other initiatives in motion before the camaign was in full swing. These initiatives weren't for the exclusive benefit of Hispanics, also for citizens of hispanic heritage immigrantion wasn't even in their top 3 priorities as far as the issues according to exit polls.

Ultimas_Blade

I find it very hard to believe that Angle put out some blatantly racist commercials. More likely, you just really don't agree with her. I could always be wrong, though, but until you provide some actual proof, I don't think I am.

And during his get out the vote initiative he used the DREAM act to specifically target immigrants. I really don't see where you're getting hung up on. Everyone knows it.

I'd definitely prefer a 4 year degree be the requirement (and the same payment requirements of citizens is a must), but overall I like the concept. I just wish it was tweaked a bit to bachelors and 4 years and full term of service, respectively. I guess in the end I support it, although half-heartedly.mattbbpl

I'm pretty sure that it'll be similar to the current requirement for immigrants who are seeking citizenship through the military by requiring them to complete their enlistment (to stop people from purposefully trying to get kicked out after two years so they can satisfy their military obligation). One thing I just thought of is that under an Executive Order signed by President Bush, an immigrant who joins the military is eligible for naturalization after only one day of service. If they get kicked out the military before completing their contract they can loose their citizenship. With the way the DREAM Act is written, Congress would have to change that law. Otherwise, the people who joined the military to satisfy the two year service obligation could, in theory, get their citizenship long before their two years of service is over. Legal immigrants who join the Army usually get their citizenship right before they graduate basic training if they apply for it the day they ship to training. The only reason illegal immigrants aren't taking advantage of it now is because non-citizens can't enlist unless they have a Green Card.

I would only support it if they had to put I WAS A ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT in bold and red on there job applications and force employers to give jobs to actual citizens over them.

I would only support it if they had to put I WAS A ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT in bold and red on there job applications and force employers to give jobs to actual citizens over them.

jaqulle999

I have two problems with it: One, it's the only reason Harry Reid won, and two, it's a form of amnesty.

I would rather something be done to help those who are actually waiting on a list to become citizens rather than help the people who crossed over into our borders illegally. Regardless of the child not being at fault.

airshocker

Actually I'd say the only reason Harry Reid won is because the republicans put him up against a psychopath who was pro theocracy and pro prohibition.

[QUOTE="ad1x2"]

I'm pretty sure that it'll be similar to the current requirement for immigrants who are seeking citizenship through the military by requiring them to complete their enlistment (to stop people from purposefully trying to get kicked out after two years so they can satisfy their military obligation). One thing I just thought of is that under an Executive Order signed by President Bush, an immigrant who joins the military is eligible for naturalization after only one day of service. If they get kicked out the military before completing their contract they can loose their citizenship. With the way the DREAM Act is written, Congress would have to change that law. Otherwise, the people who joined the military to satisfy the two year service obligation could, in theory, get their citizenship long before their two years of service is over. Legal immigrants who join the Army usually get their citizenship right before they graduate basic training if they apply for it the day they ship to training. The only reason illegal immigrants aren't taking advantage of it now is because non-citizens can't enlist unless they have a Green Card.

thegerg

Just to make it clear, this DREAM law has nothing to do with granting citizenship. Also, about the the citizenship during BCT thing for new Soldiers, when did they start doing that? A good buddy of mine in the Army applied for citizenship before enlisting and didn't get his citizenship until after his first deployment. Do they fast-track it now for SMs?

They started doing that a few months after we went into Iraq in 2003. The Army actually allows people in the DEP to fill out their N-400 and submit it when they arrive at basic training (not sure if the other branches allow that or not but the one day rule applies for everybody). If there are no issues with the application they get naturalized before graduation. People who don't submit it when they arrive at basic end up waiting longer, they end up having to take time off of work so they can do the interviews at the immigration buildings that are probably hours away. I used to be at Fort Benning and the closest one was in Atlanta, almost two hours away. As for the DREAM Act granting citizenship, I probably worded one of my answers wrong. I'm already aware it doesn't grant citizenship, it just makes them legal, so they can apply for citizenship at a later date if they complete the college or military obligation. I was just mentioning how, under current law, technically they would be eligible to apply for citizenship after one day of military service versus waiting over two years. I'm going to assume a change will be made specifically for that so they can't apply the day after they go active if the intention of the DREAM Act is to make sure they do at least two years first. The Department of Defense already has to consider rules for acceptance for them since as of right now there is no regulation in place for acceptance of formally illegal immigrants. The current enlistment policy only covers Green Card holders and people who have visas but qualify for the MAVNI Program.

Promoting illegal immigration? No thanks, no thanks, I wouldn't support that for anything.

They started doing that a few months after we went into Iraq in 2003. The Army actually allows people in the DEP to fill out their N-400 and submit it when they arrive at basic training (not sure if the other branches allow that or not but the one day rule applies for everybody). If there are no issues with the application they get naturalized before graduation. People who don't submit it when they arrive at basic end up waiting longer, they end up having to take time off of work so they can do the interviews at the immigration buildings that are probably hours away. I used to be at Fort Benning and the closest one was in Atlanta, almost two hours away. As for the DREAM Act granting citizenship, I probably worded one of my answers wrong. I'm already aware it doesn't grant citizenship, it just makes them legal, so they can apply for citizenship at a later date if they complete the college or military obligation. I was just mentioning how, under current law, technically they would be eligible to apply for citizenship after one day of military service versus waiting over two years. I'm going to assume a change will be made specifically for that so they can't apply the day after they go active if the intention of the DREAM Act is to make sure they do at least two years first. The Department of Defense already has to consider rules for acceptance for them since as of right now there is no regulation in place for acceptance of formally illegal immigrants. The current enlistment policy only covers Green Card holders and people who have visas but qualify for the MAVNI Program.

ad1x2

Yeah, you also have to give up your citizenship of any other country you have.

The military service part I'm fine with, there's no better way to show your patriotism than to to serve in the armed forces. I don't get the college part, though, that's really not doing anything selfless.UT_Wrestler

I think the reason they put the college part in there is because anybody can go to college (assuming they have a diploma or GED as well as tuition) but not anybody can join the military. Even if the DREAM Act was passed you could still be denied military service just for being overweight, being openly homosexual (unless DADT is repealed too), having asthma after your 13th birthday, or being a single parent with full or joint custody of your kids. Also, GED holders currently aren't being accepted unless they alsohave at least 15 semester hours of college right now. Less than 25% of Americans qualify for military service today and the rest are disqualified for those reasons, as well as criminal records and other things. On the other hand, you could be a one-legged homosexual diabetic with 20 kids and you could still go to college as long as you meet admission requirements.

Yeah, you also have to give up your citizenship of any other country you have.

Espada12

The requirement to give up past citizenships was rescinded a few years ago. You can be a dual-citizen but you won't qualify for a Secret or Top Secret clearance unless you renounce any non-US citizenships.