SENATE MAY ADD AMNESTY TO DEFENSE BILL!!!

DREAM Act reintroduced in Senate
Immigrants' Rights Update, Vol. 17, No. 5, September 4, 2003

[See also "Dream Act Reintroduced in Senate," Nov. 21, 2005.]

[See also "DREAM Act Passes Senate Judiciary Committee," Mar. 28, 2006.]

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.

Click to expand...

Democrats Try to Revive Immigration Provisions

By Michael Sandler and Bart Jansen, CQ Staff

Senate Democrats plan to use the defense authorization bill next week to revive a provision from the failed immigration overhaul that would put some children of illegal immigrants on a path to citizenship.

Meanwhile, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., is working to bring to the floor another provision from the immigration bill (S 1639) that would create a guest worker program for up to 1.5 million agricultural workers (S 340).

Both efforts are likely to rekindle the kind of heated debate that engulfed the Senate when the immigration overhaul measure was being considered in June.

Majority Whip Richard J. Durbin, D-Ill., is expected to offer an amendment to the defense bill (HR 1585) that would attach legislation (S 774) to allow children of illegal immigrants who entered the United States before age 16 and lived here at least five years to gain conditional legal status and eventual citizenship if they attend college or join the military for at least two years.

Durbin said Wednesday he is working on the amendment and contacting colleagues to gauge support.

“The Department of Defense has endorsed this, and I think it would be of value,” he said in an interview.

Durbin said Feinstein is searching for the right vehicle. One possibility could be the upcoming five-year farm bill, which is expected to reach the Senate floor next month.

Injecting immigration into the defense debate could be a risky move, with Republicans likely to accuse Democrats of tying up legislation needed to help U.S. troops.

Moreover, even supporters of more lenient treatment of illegal immigrants have expressed doubts that any such measure could pass after the crushing blow it suffered June 28, when proponents failed to get even a majority of votes to end debate on the comprehensive bill.

Durbin said he’s aware of such reservations, but he suggested that waiting until next year, when election-year politics will be in full bloom, would make it even more difficult to act.

He noted that senators from both parties had approached him immediately after the broader bill fell and encouraged him to move forward with the education legislation, known as the DREAM Act.

“I think there is room here for senators who opposed the comprehensive bill to still support the DREAM Act,” Durbin said.

Among those working with him to advance the measure will be Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., sponsor of the broader immigration bill. An aide to Kennedy said Durbin’s amendment is relevant to the defense bill because it would offer an incentive for children seeking legal status to join the military.

“There will be a strong effort to get this done this year,” the aide said.

Opponents at the Ready

Frank Sharry, executive director for the National Immigration Forum, which lobbied for the broad bill earlier this year, said that having an alternative strategy for passing highly contentious legislation is a necessity in such an evenly divided Congress.

“Most legislation does get done as riders on appropriations or authorization bills,” Sharry said. “That’s how it happens. This is really the way business gets done.”

The tactic of picking out potentially popular provisions of the immigration bill has already yielded some success.

The Senate in July voted, 89-1, to attach a provision to the Homeland Security spending bill (HR 2638) that provided $3 billion in emergency spending for border security.

But the Democratic proposals are not likely to enjoy that kind of support.

Indeed, one of the harshest critics of the comprehensive legislation called a news conference Wednesday to voice his objections to the plans to breathe new life into it.

Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., said the proposals could put more than 4 million illegal immigrants on a path to citizenship. That is about one-third of the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants who would have benefited from the comprehensive immigration overhaul bill he helped kill earlier this year, Sessions said.

Click to expand...

Dennis Olson said:

And replace them with WHO sassy? Unless you, and a majority of Americans are willing to "take a chance" and vote third party, the replacement dirtbags will be as bad as the current dirtbags....

Click to expand...

[FONT=Verdana,Arial] [/FONT][FONT=Verdana,Arial]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, [/FONT] [FONT=Verdana,Arial]has been introduced in the Senate by Senators Orrin Hatch (R-UT)

Click to expand...

Snow: Immigration bill opposition misjudged
Houston Chronicle : September 14 , 2007 -- by RICHARD S. DUNHAM

"President Bush, meet NumbersUSA and its 450,000+ members!" Great job, troops!

Outgoing White House press secretary Tony Snow said today that the Bush administration had underestimated the ferocity of opposition to White House-backed immigration legislation.

"I freely admit that we underestimated the (public) skepticism," Snow said over breakfast with a group of reporters on his final day on the job.

Snow said that the White House was not prepared for the anger of foes of illegal immigration, who believed that government at all levels had failed to secure the nation's borders. While the public backlash is aimed "not merely (at) the Bush administration," he conceded that the White House "made some miscalculations, as well."

The president's chief spokesman, who has waged a very public battle with cancer during his two years in the high-profile job, said that though a compromise immigration bill came close to passage, the process now "requires a much longer debate."

"We should have gotten it through last time," he said. "This is an issue that will be with us -- it will not go away."

After the 2007 debacle, he said, the government must demonstrate that the federal government can secure the border "in a competent way" before legislation that would allow American companies to hire more immigrants and permit the legalization of illegal workers can gain traction on Capitol Hill.

But Snow argued strongly for a flow of immigrant workers. "We have this big, booming economy," he said, "and we don't have enough workers."

Calling America "a nation of immigrants," he said Congress and the president needed to come up with a plan to deal with the about 12 million people who are illegally in the country today. "A lot of these people really are pursuing the traditional path to the American dream," he said.

To win political support for comprehensive legislation, Snow said the government needed to re-establish "the credibility of the rule of law" by protecting the border and requiring illegal immigrants to pay substantial penalties -- "not just a wrist slap, but something significant" -- before taking their place "at the back of the line" to citizenship. While awaiting legal status, they should not be permitted to collect welfare and should be required to maintain continuous employment and crime-free lives.

Despite the passionate opposition to illegal immigration on the Republican right and populist left, Snow said that both political parties should be sensitive to the feelings of Hispanic voters.

"No political party is going to be able to survive (without the) fastest-growing voting bloc in America," he said.

Asked what he thought of the 2008 Republican presidential candidates' repeated attacks on President Bush's immigration record, Snow uncharacteristically demurred.

"Ask me that question in a week -- or even tomorrow," he said. "As the president's press secretary, I'm not going to step into that one."

Click to expand...

mistaken1 said:

I am not sure who these senators represent but one thing I know for sure, they do not represent the American people.

Click to expand...

rhughe13 said:

So far, Numbers is saying that have zero senators that will say no to this act. They have 20 possible no's.

They have sent over 43,000 faxes out of numbers as of yesterday afternoon.

Hang on folks I think we are going to loose this one next week.

Click to expand...