Unfair?: US Senate To Consider DREAM Act
Shawn, a subscriber and frequent commenter here at Clever Dude, as well as a personal friend of the Clever Dude and Dudette will posting occasional guest articles. You can read his introduction here.
By Shawn
I had hoped that my first guest post on this site would less controversial, but I felt I needed to start spreading the word about this issue. Many thanks to the Clever Dude for allowing me this forum for this purpose.
Tomorrow, 9/21, the US Senate is set to vote on H.R. 1585, the Defense Department authorization bill for fiscal year 2008. Buried in this defense appropriations bill is amendment SA 2919 — The Dream Act. Basically, this act provides the ability for children of illegal immigrants to attend public universities at in-state tuition rates. While this seems like a noble idea, this act extends to illegal immigrants a benefit not available to US Citizens and non-citizens here legally. Investor’s Business Daily has a good article about the act.
I’ve begun to email all US Senators about the issue. Here is a link to the list of US Senators (it contains links to their contact forums).
Here is the text of the email I’m sending to the senators:
I’ve recently learned that the Senate is considering the passage of the DREAM act which will give illegal immigrants the ability to attend public universities at at in-state tuition rates.
This act create a system where the illegal immigrants are now getting a benefit not extended to legal US citizens and non-citizens who have come here legally.
I believe if you are intent on passing this, then you should abolish the whole notion of in-state versus out-of-state tuition, thus making it fair for ALL (most importantly, the US Citizens who pay taxes to fund the universities).
If this passes, I would expect and encourage any US citizen subjected to out-of-state tuition to organize a class-action lawsuit to reclaim the difference between the out-of-state rates they’ve paid and the in-state rates offered to illegals.
Please do the right thing and either make this apply to everyone or kill the bill. It is your duty as a US Senator to protect the interests of US Citizens — not of people who blatantly break the laws of a sovereign nation.
I’d like to hear what the Clever Dude audience thinks of the legislation. Although my stance is fairly obvious, email your Senator and let them know YOUR stance, either for or against.
Try one of these related posts too!:
- Best Posts from September, 2007
- Best Frugality Posts from the Festival of Frugality #98
- Do you like my stories?
- Personal Finance Basics: Job Search Techniques
Leave a Comment
If you would like to make a comment, please fill out the form below.
As a legal immigrant it’s my pleasure to have the first comment on this.
It’s the same old story like it’s always been. Things are constantly being made more difficult for legal immigrants: H1B quotas are ridiculously low (I was one of the lucky ones). Even after the H1B there is more difficulty to get permanent residency.
Whereas, the government is bending over backwards for (no disrespect intended) some people who jumped a fence or road a raft.
I got in-state tuition when I first came here, but that came as a result of a scholarship due to my high SAT score and it was maintained by my GPA every semester.
So the whole illegal immigration thing just rubs me the wrong way. But as with all these things, there’s always some logic behind it. Educated immigrants take the educated jobs (or so they say. I had to jump high and low just to find an employer that would consider doing H1bB) whereas illegal immigrants take the jobs that no Americans want to do?
So I guess if you look at it that way, they’re just trying to satisfy the majority. It still sucks though.
What am I missing? Children of US citizens and legal aliens already can attend colleges and university at in-state tuition rates.
I’m with you Shawn. They either need to eliminate in-state versus out-of-state tuition or simply kill the bill. This is the first time I heard about this. Thanks for bringing it to our attention!
Plonkee, here in the U.S., most state universities have rates for in-state students versus out-of-state students. The in-state students get cheaper tuition because they generally pay the state income tax (or their parents do). Out-of-state tuition can be double or more than the in-state rates, which makes this a big deal.
I know many people from college who went to Penn State from NY, MD, VA, DC, NJ and even further states (CA). They spent much more than I did for the exact same education. So, giving an illegal who doesn’t pay state income tax the benefits of the taxpayer is just plain wrong. This isn’t (or shouldn’t be) an issue of race, class or language; there’s a reason the word “illegal” is in illegal immigrants, and why legal immigrants should also be ticked off about this legislation!
Yeah, this wasn’t meant to be a commentary on whether or not we need to change the system and make give illegal immigrants legal status.
This was meant to show that the US government is now attempting to extend benefits to illegal immigrants not available to the US Citizens that would be paying for the benefit.
First, why do you assume that illegal immigrants don’t pay state income taxes, Clever Dude?
Second, Clever Dude’s friends from other states did have the option of going to Penn State for the in-state price: They (and/or their families) could have moved to Pennsylvania and established residency there. Of course, relocating is more complicated when you’re a white-collar middle-class worker, perhaps in a specialized profession, than when you’re an unskilled laborer taking the “jobs that Americans don’t want to do.” Is that why you’re upset?
Third, if this isn’t about race, class, or language, what justification can there be for barring anyone from this country at all? Does being born in the United States make you better than someone who was born in Mexico? If not, then what?
Johanna, your suggestion of moving a whole family in-state for 4 years is just plain dumb. Get real. People live in a state for a reason, and in many cases, these families had kids going to college in different states, including their own. My family is mostly blue collar workers, except for some of the women. I’m the first white collar worker. It wasn’t even a thought for them to pick up and leave the state because of the costs and risks.
Perhaps I’m naive, but I would think you need to file your taxes under a tax ID, mainly your SSN (or other form of LEGAL identification). Do illegals have this? No. Hence why they’re illegal.
And have I said I’m better than anyone? Read through my comment and tell me where I said that. Stop being so defensive and listen to what people are saying. Stop forcing words into people’s mouths when they don’t belong there.
There are legal and illegal means to immigrate to any country, including our own. We don’t base it on race, but we do base it on country of origin (hence quotas). Quotas still aren’t based on race, even though it may seem like it since, uh, well, most people trying to get in from India are Indian, Chinese from China, Mexican from Mexico, Antarctican from Antarctica (huh?).
When you have a good argument, come back and tell me.
Johanna,
I can see your argument, but you’re ignoring the second group of people affected by this.
International students who come to this country legally (by getting the appropriate student visas) still have to pay out-of-state tuition. They don’t have the option of gaining in-state status.
Thus, you are actually penalizing anyone who follows the rules when entering the country.
It is worth pointing out that in the case of illegal immigrants, their families are typically working in the US and based on my understanding of this bill, in the same state as the University. Thus, their families do at least pay local taxes even if they do not pay state or federal income tax. On the other hand, typically International students have families living in another country. Therefore, their families do not pay local taxes. A similar argument can be applied to out-of-state US residents, though Federal income tax does provide marginal support. Perhaps we should consider a middle tuition level that acknowledges the level of support provided by the families to the local, state, and Federal Governments.
Johanna, look at FREMO’s comment for how to provide a constructive criticism or addition to a post
Thanks for the idea FREMO.
Wow…Shawn came out of the gate running choosing a hot political topic for his first post! It is a tough sell to penalize international students for following the rules. However, from what I have understood of this bill the background was to boost military recruitment by allowing soldiers to receive legal status after serving for a period of time.
To play devil’s advocate it may be cheaper to give a child a slight discount on a college education than to deport that person multiple times. The college education then producing an educated, tax paying citizen.
It’s great that there is debate on this here.
Another problem with this legislation is the way it’s being moved forward.
It’s being buried in a defense appropriations bill which means supporters are hoping to pass it with little to no debate.
Do you want to be the Senator the votes against ensuring our troops have the necessary tools because of this amendment?
I heartily agree with everything Baz wrote. I too am a legal immigrant. In high school I studied extremely hard, and took the SAT 3 times in order to get the score needed to receive a merit based scholarship. This allowed me to qualify for instate tuition. I decided to stay a year beyond the 4-year span of the scholarship, and had to pay out of state tuition.
Like Baz mentioned, the government has made it exceedingly hard for LEGAL immigrants, especially post 9/11. After many 11 frustrating years of fiddling with different visas, waiting, endless paperwork, and lawyer fees, I finally have my green card. If I have to go through all that, every other immigrant has to too!
So yes, the vast majority of the illegal immigration issues bother the heck out of me. It is all incredibly unfair to everyone who immigrates here legally.
Seems that someone didn’t think thinds through…here’s an example.
A family illegally immigrates here, say two parents and two children. Later on they have a third child, born in the US and therefore a legal citizen. When it comes time for college, the two older children (not legal citizens) can choose any state school they wish, at state rates, while the youngest (legal citizen) only gets the state rate where he/she lives.
Sounds like the best and brightest at work in our government!
But that’s not the way it works, Franky. Regardless of documentation status, you get in-state tuition rates at universities in the state where you live.
Here’s a link about taxes:
http://compensation.blr.com/display.cfm/id/154024
It’s specifically about payroll taxes, but if they’re having those deducted from their paycheck, they’re almost certainly having income taxes withheld too.
Keep in mind, too, that many states generate at least as much revenue from sales taxes as from income taxes. Everybody pays sales taxes, whether they have a real ID or a fake ID or no ID.
So the reasoning that undocumented workers are not entitled to state services because they don’t pay taxes is simply groundless.
Johanna, there is most definitely grounds for this debate. THEY’RE ILLEGAL! But that’s not the main point of discussion I guess. Just by buying a pack of gum as I drive through Virginia doesn’t mean I should be allowed to get in-state rates at Virginia Tech or UVA.
Yes, illegals need to buy their groceries, clothing and all other essentials, and that does contribute to the state and local coffers. However, that does not make you a resident of that state. And just because you live in a home in that state, doesn’t make you legal.
There’s 2 sides to this, and they both have impact in the debate:
1) They don’t pay their share of the income taxes, and if they do, it’s through illegal means (they ARE undocumented workers by the way)
2) They didn’t follow the processes dictated by this government to apply for and receive appropriate LEGAL immigrant status.
I’d like to know why you feel so strongly. Are you illegal yourself? Harboring illegals? Just sympathetic? Were you or a loved one the victim of a hate crime?
What is illegal is illegal for a reason. It doesn’t mean the enforcers or sympathizers also are haters of those breaking the law. Don’t place your bias against the wrong people here. Although I am aware that every person in this country, legal or illegal, is a human being with thoughts, feelings, emotions and needs, that does not mean we should then give special treatment just because they may be living in a low social status, close to poverty, etc. They are here illegally and should follow what millions of others have done before them: apply for a Visa, Green Card and Citizenship.
And no one better pull out the “everyone is illegal except for the Native Americans” thing, because the Native Americans didn’t have immigration laws, and I can’t atone for what someone else’s ancestors (not mine) did 500+ years ago. This is here and now, and we need to understand the issues based on today’s laws.
Readers, you haven’t seen me so opinionated before (except for the lazy people on elevators article), but to me this is cut and dry. You follow the law, you reap the benefits. You don’t follow the law, however unfair to you specifically, you shouldn’t be allowed to get the benefits. Period.
Johanna,
Your link specifically talks about social security taxes.
Illegal immigrants are paying into this, there’s no doubt. But, they way in which they are doing it is against the law. They are either using fake social security numbers or buying the stolen social security numbers of US Citizens (i.e. identity theft).
I wish I could find the link, but I read an article about a single mom who was working two part time jobs to support herself and her child. She didn’t earn much, but because of this, she qualified for federal subsidies to help her find affordable housing.
However, an illegal immigrant got a hold of her social security number and used it to gain employment. This worker’s income was now being reported under the single mom’s social security number. Because of this, the federal government decided that the single mom was now making too much money to qualify for the federal rent subsidy.
I do agree with Clever Dude. The discussion has gotten a bit off topic. Based on the laws today, they are breaking the law (whether or not that law should be changed is an entirely different debate). The debate here is that someone breaking the law is now getting a special benefit by the fact that they are breaking the law.
Period? So anyone who commits any sort of crime, from first-degree murder to smoking pot to jaywalking, gets themselves and their children disqualified from receiving in-state tuition or any other government benefits? Because that seems to be what you’re saying.
Or is illegal immigration a special kind of crime? After all, no other crime gets people shouting “THEY’RE ILLEGAL” as opposed to “they entered the country illegally” or “they turned right on red illegally” or “they recovered sports memorabilia from a Las Vegas hotel room illegally.” See what I mean? Break any other law, and you might be labeled a “criminal” - someone who did something illegal. Enter the country against the law, and you, yourself, your very existence, is illegal.
What’s illegal is illegal for a reason - I don’t disagree with that. But that doesn’t mean that all the reasons are good reasons, or reasons I agree with. It was illegal for Rosa Parks to sit down on a bus. It was illegal for somebody’s ancestors (not yours) to dump a bunch of tea into Boston Harbor. It used to be illegal in many places for people of different races to marry, or for women to vote, or for black farm laborers to quit their jobs. If everyone blindly refused to question the law, there would never be progress.
Why do I feel so strongly about this? Because as much as you claim otherwise, I think this absolutely is about race and class issues. And as much as you claim otherwise, I really don’t see how anyone can look another person in the face and think “YOU are illegal” without hating them, at least a little bit.
“What is illegal is illegal for a reason.”
“The debate here is that someone breaking the law is now getting a special benefit by the fact that they are breaking the law.”
In criminal law there is a separation of crimes into malum in se and malum prohibitum. The latter being crimes that are so not because they are inherently so, but because they are legally so (like breaking a law requiring the filing of tax returns). I think that immigration laws fall into that category and that immigration status is a legal fiction and has changed back and forth in this country’s short history. People feel strongly about the issue when they think about it in terms of breaking the law.
I think that if people can calm their strong emotional reactions it is an interesting discussion to have alongside the in state/out of state tuition debate because both deal in what I like to call legal fictions.
Johanna, I understand the nature of laws to progress with the times, and often laws lag behind the social norm. Shawn already stated that in his comment.
You’re off-base with comparing coming into the country illegally with perhaps me jaywalking or running a red light. I AM a citizen already and AM already entitled to the benefits of citizenship. If I break the law as a citizen, I don’t get stripped of my citizenship.
An immigrant who does not follow the law to come into this country is a criminal as soon as they step foot on U.S. land, or any other land that has immigration laws. If they jaywalk or run a red light, then they’re still a criminal, but committing a new crime. They never had the rights of a citizen in the first place. Giving the rights of citizenship is reserved for those with parents who are citizens (and earned it legally at some point in time) and are thus citizens, or followed the processes that the U.S. has put forth to become a citizen (like with Baz and May).
Here’s an example: If you went to classes at a college without paying tuition or even registering for classes, are you entitled to a degree? No. I can’t sneak into astronaut class and then declare I should go to the moon.
Other countries have different laws, but most countries (as far as I know) have an immigration policy. Some countries, such as Kuwait, only give citizenship based on your ancestry and no matter what, you’ll never get citizenship, and the nice welfare, even if you live and work there for 100 years. Other countries have pretty lax borders, but they must protect them, so they have laws anyway.
If you’re going to argue about a topic, then talk about the specific situation and argue based on a set of certain criteria. Give me reasons why you think that illegal immigrants should receive special benefits. Don’t give me the riot act about hate. Don’t ever think you can call me a racist or bigot. There’s no room here for that. I don’t appreciate or condone it, and I will mark your comments as spam if you continue down that track. Think about your argument a bit before posting it.
My visceral reaction to the proposed legislation is to oppose it. It seems fundamentally unfair to extend financial benefits to those who have entered our country without permission. I wish it were that easy, however. Best estimates are that we have 12 million illegal immigrants in the U.S. Isolating that population from education, health care and other basic social services will not serve our country in the long-term. The illegal immigrant population will grow and it will age. One way or another, we will need to address this issue, and mass deportation is not a viable or advisable solution. Do I support the legislation? No. Why? We need a comprehensive solution to the immigration problem, starting with securing our borders. Ad hoc, back door immigration bills like the one described only adds to the frustration, not the solution.
DR, I like the way you put it. Yes, we have to deal with it, and I suppose booting them out would be pretty messy. Actually, it would never happen. So perhaps the answer is to secure our borders to stop more from coming and work on locating and legalizing the ones who are here.
But general amnesty is NOT the right way to do it. Make them earn it like any other immigrant.
Great post, excellent site
I just graduated from UCLA. The DREAM act was a major issue on campus, because of the Latino population of the school and of Los Angeles.
To me, this is cut and dry too. There are rules. People who break the rules should pay for doing that.
I have a friend who is still attending UCLA, but is from the East Coast. He paid twice what I did in tuition. There is NO justifiable reason why someone who is not a citizen should get to pay less than him, the son of two American citizens who pay their taxes each year.
There is currently a class action lawsuit in California by students in the University of California system who are paying out of state tuition while other non-citizens are able to pay in state tuition.
In California, the financial problems associated with illegal immigrants using resources funded by citizens are clearly seen through closing hospitals (flooded by illegal immigrants who cannot be refused care even if they cannot pay). This is the same at universities, where tuition is rising due to budget issues. Every student who has not contributed through income taxes that is able to use the state resources is contributing to the financial problem.
This is not about race; it is about money.
I really don’t get why we constantly reward bad behavior.
Now I see everyone is getting hooked up on the comparison of illegal immigrants to citizens.
Let me put things into perspective and compare oranges to oranges (well maybe grapefruits):
Baz - Legal Immigrant
Zab - Illegal Immigrant
Baz - lived in TX since he got here
Zab - lived in TX since he got here
Baz - Has to “qualify” for in-state tuition
Zab - Gets in-state tuition for no apparent reason.
How does this make sense?
I completely understand what Baz said above and agree with Shawn when he says:
“International students who come to this country legally (by getting the appropriate student visas) still have to pay out-of-state tuition. They don’t have the option of gaining in-state status.”
On a lighter side, international students in my department have been joking about how life would be easier and how they might end up being US citizens faster by first becoming “illegals”.
So, in that sense my gut feeling is against the act.
For those advocating the rights of illegal immigrants, do you also advocate discontinuing all US legal immigration procedures and completely open our borders which would instantly increase our population 10 fold? Or do you believe people should be honest and simply go through the legal processes to come here?
@cleverdude: Thanks for the clarification.
Would it be more acceptable for most people if the children of illegal immigrants were allowed in-state tuition in their state of residence?
So (for example) if you are illegal alien and live and go to high school in Texas, then you could get in-state tuition at the University of Texas, but not at Penn State.
@Plonkee:
“Would it be more acceptable for most people if the children of illegal immigrants were allowed in-state tuition in their state of residence?”
That seems like a good idea in theory … but what is stopping them from moving to the city where they want to go to college? I grew up in Arizona and wanted to go to school in MA. I had to live there for 2 years and work and pay taxes in order to qualify for instate tuition there, where an illegal immigrant just has to show up and say “i’m illegal” and they get in state tuition.
I can also see the bigger picture here and think it is a better idea to make education available, but do we have to do it in a way that penalizes citizens?
Wow. I’m very excited about the amount of debate that this post generated.
@DR:
I agree with your sentiments. As can be discerned, I tend to lean a little right on most issues, but I am also a Christian. And the Christian values I hold teach me that every human life is a precious gift and should be treated with respect. I also believe that every person in the US (legal or not) has the right to basic social services (even though the very idea of providing these services to illegals does nothing to deter them from coming here illegally). Currently, children of illegal immigrants have access to free public education and are not barred from attending colleges or universities in this nation — so I don’t believe that we are restricting access to education. My only problem with the legislation is the fact that it creates a loophole for one particular demographic while ignoring all others.
There you go! Well said Shawn. That’s what I was trying to say, lol.
Please understand, I’m not disagreeing because of my particular position (I’m done with school, for now, so it doesn’t really bother me). My position adds a third perspective, instead of just immigrants and citizens.
BUT, it’s like this: If ONE particular demographic group should have preference in this matter, why are we giving it to ILLEGAL immigrant? I don’t get it. Fair is fair. If we’re rewarding people with in-state tuition, shouldn’t we start with the guys that follow the rules?
People are not illegal.
I will be unsubscribing now. I thought this was a decent blog about finance not politics.
Say what???
That’s the term, illegal immigrant. No one here made it up.
And this has a great deal to do with finance. It all boils down to money.
I’m sorry to see a subscriber go, but I apologize if you thought my site was purely about finance. As one commenter replied to your comment, this definitely boils down to money, which is the core of finance.
If you’re unsubscribing because of my opinions or presentation, then I understand, but I’d also like to know your idea of finances if paying thousands more for tuition is not included in your definition. I’ve never been the normal finance writer, because I give information from my own life and experiences and leave the rest up to the professionals. That’s why my tagline is Family, Marriage, Finances & Life. It’s not just a PF site.
Thanks for being a subscriber. I would like to see you back, but respect your decision to leave.
You know, I should add that there are illegal immigrants from all countries. Sure, right now most are coming in from Mexico because of the quality of living and proximity, but if this particular debate was about race, then I would be saying “well, let the white people from Canada and Europe get the benefit, but not Mexicans”. No, they’re all illegal immigrants, regardless of race.
This is not a race issue. This is not a class issue. People without a better argument make it one because they don’t understand the issue. This is an issue purely about money and legal processes. Not race.
@Johanna - you’re a troll. And I say that in the very nicest way. ;o)
@Everyone else - something else to consider that is really, really important:
If illegal aliens (people or extraterrestrials, doesn’t matter if they’re here illegally) are given free choice of American state universities at in-state rates, the number of illegal aliens who attend college will go up. They will be competing with American citizens and LEGAL aliens for a limited number of admission slots each year.
When one understands that admissions are biased to preferentially admit MINORITIES (even when the “minority” is actually in the MAJORITY in that area), this means that the illegal aliens will be displacing persons LEGALLY entitled to attend the university.
The result of this will be an ILLEGAL population that is better educated than the LEGAL population in a few years. That is a threat to national security, and must be stopped.
Baz: I think Nantahala’s objection is calling people “illegal” instead of “illegal immigrants.” The latter is a reasonably accurate descriptive term. The former is not. Actions are illegal; people are not. That was the point I was trying to make earlier.
Clever Dude and Shawn: First you tried to argue that illegal immigrants should not be entitled to pay in-state tuition because they don’t pay taxes. I pointed out that they do pay taxes. Then you tried to argue that they should not be entitled to pay in-state tuition simply because they have broken the law.
But we do not deny in-state tuition to CHILDREN of people who break any other law. (If you’re starting college five years after you immigrated illegally, it’s overwhelmingly likely that you were a minor at the time you immigrated, so it’s your parents who bear the responsibility for breaking the law, not you.) If both your parents are in prison for murder, does that disqualify you from getting in-state tuition? I don’t think it does.
Would you care to try again?
Johanna,
I never used not paying taxes as a basis for opposing the legislation. I responded to your assertion that they do pay taxes. I’m not arguing that point.
You are correct, we do not deny in-state tuition to children of people who break any other law. I would argue that we would deny that right to the person who broke the law until they’ve paid their debt to society.
What that debt is depends on the crime. If a person murders another, then that debt would be jail time. Once they’ve served their time, they would be eligible for the same benefits as everyone else.
The problem you’re failing to address is that, just because the child was a minor doesn’t mean that they weren’t breaking the law as well. Are you saying that children are incapable of committing crimes? If that were the case, we wouldn’t have a juvenile court system.
Once the illegal immigrants have paid their debt to society, then I would argue that they would be eligible for the same benefits. In this case, deportation followed by entering the country in a legal manner.
Finally, my wording does indicate that we should not allow the benefit because they are breaking the law. Maybe I should clarify. Currently, they are not allowed in-state tuition because they are not state residents (the basis for getting that benefit). The legislation seeks to create a loophole for them, however, it is doing so for a population that continuously ignores the law.
I think the point is that children don’t have the opportunity to not break the law. If their parents immigrate then they have to go with them. I have no idea whether it is normal in US law to punish children for crimes that they were unable to not commit but I can see why some people would object. (I have no idea whether or not its is normal in British law either, the idea has never occurred to me before).
As an outsider, to me the biggest clue that this legislation is probably not a good idea (from the point of view of the general public) is that it is tacked onto defence legislation.
Somehow I doubt that the majority of illegal immigrants seeking a higher level of education are “children”.
On the Latino side immigration is a very painful subject because most of Latin America feels that Mexicans get special treatment (much like Cubans in Florida) — and it cause for a lot of strife and conflict within our community. Why should a Mexican farmworker get preferential treatment over a doctor from Caracas? That’s a question I’ve never been able to answer — it still troubles me to this day.
Being of PR descent, I’ve always had a hard time with the illegal immigration thing, especially in Puerto Rico where social services are already strained with regular citizens. When we get an influx from DR, Cuba, Haiti, or any of our other Caribbean brothers and sisters trying to jump ship — the strain on local communities where crime rate is one of the highest in the world, jobs are scarce and schools are pushed to the limit — is very visible. Larger cities like LA can absorb more immigrants because they are usually stimulating the economy or giving back to it in some way. This is almost never the case in PR — there really are no extra jobs available for people looking for those golden opportunities.
It’s heartbreaking at times, but I believe you should take care of your own first and foremost.
On the one hand you want to be able to extend opportunities to people who need them, and on the other hand you have to take care of the people you already have.
Issues like these are by nature without a win-win resolution.
No matter what you decide, someone will suffer.
In addendum, I would like to clarify that a person’s social class should not be any more a determining factor than their nationality… in regards to my farmworker vs. doctor comment.
Stop breaking the law. This is so annonying WRONG IS WRONG!!!!! There is no nice/or good way to spin it. The United States has rules in place for a reason. If you don’t like the United States Laws for coming to the state legally, then please repect them and don’t come!!!!! If your a good smart person, stay in your own country and try to fix it they need your more then we do. We as United States Citizen have a Great Country because GOOD MEN AND WOMEN WORKED for it!!!!!!!! You should not get to be a part of if it if you break US Law!
“Law” is relative, isnt it?
Wow m. “If you don’t like the …”, “If your good smart person, stay in your own country…”.
Wow. Such hostility, such anger, such closed mindedness. The sad thing is I’ve come to expect it. I mean, you guys (citizens) have had a lot to worry about with the whole 911 thing, so I guess I understand where some of it is coming from. But what you’re doing m, is stereotyping. You’re basically saying that the US would be better with no immigrants (legal or otherwise).
But it’s all good.
I have no problem with legal immigration. We have over 12 million illegal aliens in the US they use our health care, roads, schools. It is showing up higher insurance, taxes, and tuition. Extra cost to build boarders, money for fuel for deportation, is all costing more and more money.
The government has a set number it allows into the US, to stop it form becoming over populated. Sneaking in causing my government to waste its valuable time talking about illegal aliens in our county, instead, of important discussions like Medicare, Health Coverage, and other import issue. It is extremely rude, to feel a right to get my same liberties by just sneaking into the US. Law can be changed, yes… but this is a “novel” idea, if you don’t follow it before it is changed you are BREAKING IT!!!! And that is never ok….
I’m so tired of people crying, about getting sent back. You knew it was a possibility when you snuck over here… and for the most part it is US Policy to send you back…
- i’m only trying to say… please come over legally….. and be proud to be a us citizen and if your working with the government on being a legal citizen even better!!!
I love going to ball games with old vet’s(WWII) that are still very “proud to be an American.”
All-
Please read the latest Wikipedia version for the DREAM Act:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DREAM_Act
In the entry, you will see that all references to the “in-state tuition” measures have been removed.