THE D.R.E.A.M. ACT

The concept of “comprehensive” legislation refers to a number of issues being included in a single bill. A comprehensive bill may include one or more parts that can also stand on their own as separate legislation. A good example in immigration reform is the DREAM Act (Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors Act) which is part of comprehensive immigration reform as well as separate legislation.


This bipartisan legislation, reintroduced on March 26, 2009, addresses the situation faced by young people who were brought to the United States years ago as undocumented immigrant children, and who have since grown up here but are being denied the ability to fully contribute to society. The DREAM Act would provide certain undocumented youth conditional legal status and eventual citizenship, if they attend college or join the military. It would also allow immigrant students access to higher education by returning to states the authority to determine who qualifies for in-state tuition.

Requirements:

• Age: Immigrant students who must have entered the U.S. before age 16.


• Academic: The student must have been accepted for admission into a two-year or four-year institution of higher education or have earned a high school diploma or a GED certificate.


• Long-term U.S. residence: The student must reside in the U.S. when the law is enacted. In addition, those eligible must have lived in the U.S. for at least five years preceding the date of the enactment of the act.


• Good moral character: Immigrant students must demonstrate good moral character as defined in immigration law. In general, students must have no criminal background.
  If the requirements are met, the student can apply for conditional status, which would last up to six years. Within six years, the student must: graduate from a 2-year institution of higher education, serve in the U.S. Military for at least 2 year, or complete at least 2 years toward a 4-year degree.

What it means for students: In 2006 the Arizona Interfaith Network organized against Proposition 300 (now a law that requires undocumented students to pay out of state tuition). AIN surfaced hundreds of stories from students who moved to the USA with their families while they were infants/children. Many of these students did not know they were undocumented until their teenage years. The DREAM Act could allow these students to come out of the shadows and fulfill their human potential.

Economic Connection: The DREAM Act could provide a way to increase the tax base for state, federal and local governments, According to the US Department of Commerce; a high school graduate earns $1.2 million in the course of a 40-year span career compared to $2.1 million for a person with a Bachelor’s degree. A person holding a master’s degree on average earns $2.5 million in a 40-year period. Therefore a single person with a bachelor’s degree who earns an average $60,000 of taxable income will pay $11,564 in taxes and welfare annually; in a 40-year span they will have contributed $462,560.

National Security Implication: Allowing undocumented students a pathway to citizenship by joining the armed forces will support our national security efforts and lessen their pressure on recruitment.

OUR CURRENT POLITICAL BACKDROP

July 24, 2009:

Regardless of political affiliation, any politician seeking office in Arizona faces the challenge posed by the broken federal immigration policy. No exceptions. The situation is especially acute in Congressional districts and Senate races with an intensely polarized electorate. Our response is not to further inflame an already divided electorate but to explore the basis for building mutual respect, primarily through education and conversation.

Let’s start with how our Congressional leaders seem to line up on the issue as of now. Broadly speaking, all of Arizona’s Congressional delegation, with the exception of Senator John Kyl and Representatives John Shadegg and Trent Franks, support comprehensive immigration reform. But the devil is in the details…. and in 2010 electoral politics.

Senator John McCain, who has paid an historic price for attempting to advance comprehensive immigration reform in past years, will be contested in the Republican U.S. Senate primary by Chris Simcox, founder of the Minutemen. This poses a special challenge to Senator McCain’s participation in the coming legislative battle over CIR. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick, Rep. Jeff Flake and Rep. Harry Mitchell all run in districts with strong, vocal and numerous opponents of CIR. Again, a 2010 electoral challenge in each case.

The current focus by New York Senator Charles Schumer, who is taking the lead on CIR in the Senate, is on border security. Senator Schumer seems to believe that an aggressive stance in this area will help create the space inside of which CIR can move forward.

President Obama is trying to move health care reform through Congress. After that comes climate change legislation and credit market reforms. Then immigration reform, if all goes as planned.

AIR, in collaboration with AIN organizations and allies, propose a course of action that will be constructive regardless of the fate of specific legislative initiatives, whether immigration reform moves forward to passage …or not…in whole or in part.

Frank Pierson

HOW WE ARE DIFFERENT

July 17, 2009:

Arizonans for Immigration Reform will focus on the Arizona implications of the national debate surrounding Comprehensive Immigration Reform. Our perspective differs somewhat from the national reform movement and DC-based CIR messengers because of our unique angle of vision – we live the outcomes of a broken system every day in a state that is Ground Zero for the consequences of failed immigration policies.

We also should observe in this first update that on occasion our perspective will differ from that of some activists who often make news in Arizona. A case in point is our response to DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano’s initiative recently announced to reform use of the 287g program as implemented by ICE.

We take this move by Secretary Napolitano to be a potentially important step towards reining in rogue law enforcement in Arizona, and particularly the behavior of Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio. In two separate sessions with DHS Undersecretary John Morton organized by Maricopa County Supervisor Mary Rose Wilcox, Valley Interfaith Project leaders presented the case for stronger oversight and a clear policy change to targeting serious crime. Secretary Napolitano seems to be listening.

Arizona faith communities have firsthand experience dealing with the consequences of Sheriff Arpaio’s sweeps. We will be the first to know if the new DHS oversight will or will not improve the situation as it is lived out by families in Maricopa County communities.

Frank Pierson