What I'm Thankful For.

Being undocumented.. well.. sucks. There are many things that have been denied to me because I don't have that little piece of paper. I can't find another job because I know I wouldn't be able to find one legally. I can't drive a car because I'm unable to get a driver's license. But most importantly, I can't go to school full-time because of the super expensive international tuition I have to pay. And let's not forget the awkward conversations that arise from these such as "Why don't you drive?" "You're still in school? Aren't you 21?" "You've been working there for HOW long??"And while all of these things should make me not want to get out of bed in the morning, I can't help but feel optimistic of what next year will bring.

You see, being a DREAMer is not only about being an undocumented student. It is also about being a fighter. Every day, DREAMers across the country are faced with obstacles because of their status. But instead of giving up, we fight. We fight for our right to be considered American. We fight for our right to an education, for our right to live a normal life. Because we deserve it. We've earned it. And while some people believe we shouldn't be in this country, they will never be able to take away the fact that we are Americans. They can't take away the fact that this is our home.

And while this may shock some people, some good things have come out from being undocumented. This is not to say that I'm glad I'm undocumented, I'd much rather be legal. But I am not ashamed of being a DREAMer. As a result of my status, I value education in a way many U.S. college students don't. Instead of wasting my money on going out and partying, I save it in order to pay for school. I study and work hard to make sure I keep my 4.0. And even though I'm going to have to wake up bright and early next semester, I can't wait to go to school because I love learning. I love homework, I love lectures. But not only has being a DREAMer helped me appreciate school, it has also helped me appreciate life. It has helped me appreciate the things I have; a roof over my head, food to eat, a bed to sleep on. Simple things that many people across the country and the world don't have.

Perhaps I would feel the same way if I wasn't a DREAMer, but there's no way of knowing. Being a DREAMer has made me a better person, and for that I am thankful.


Happy holidays, everyone!

Senate Poised to Act Quickly on Key Issues

According to Paul Kane from the Washington Post, the DREAM Act seems to have a very good chance of passing next year.

Civil rights: After the failure of sweeping immigration overhaul, Democrats scaled back their effort to focus on the DREAM Act. The legislation would have halted deportation efforts of children who are here illegally, giving them citizenship opportunities if they entered the country before age 16 and have lived here for five years.

That bill was blocked after receiving 52 votes, but four supporters were not present. For the 111th Congress, seven Democrats will replace Republicans who voted against the bill. Barring a push for broader immigration restructuring by Obama, Senate aides said this smaller measure should have enough support to pass.
Source

Let this provide us with enough motivation to keep fighting to make our DREAMs a reality. Yes, we can. Yes, we will!

Fighting Misinformation - Part I

This is the first installment of the "Fighting Misinformation" series I decided to embark on.

As I mentioned in one of my posts, there is a lot of false information regarding the DREAM Act. This information has been mostly spread by the anti-immigration/anti-DREAM Act crowd. I realize that their minds cannot be changed; however, there are people (U.S citizens included) who would support this piece of legislation if they were aware of the facts surrounding it. One of the goals of this blog is to inform the few readers I might have about DREAM, and I thought this was the best way to do it.

Enough talking. Let's begin.


1) The DREAM Act is not amnesty.

Amnesty (n): an act of forgiveness for past offenses, esp. to a class of persons as a whole.

The idea of amnesty does not apply to DREAM Act beneficiaries. Amnesty, as shown above, implies that the person has committed a crime or offense. Students eligible for the DREAM Act did not commit a crime by coming to this country. They were children and infants, brought to the U.S. by their parents. The only "crime" they committed was to follow them.

Furthermore, DREAM Act students will not be "granted" citizenship after the enactment of the act. They will have to complete at least 2 years of college or 2 years in the military in order to be eligible for citizenship. They will also have to continue to show good moral character and have no criminal record in order to qualify. Furthermore, the DREAM Act legislation states that students will only be eligible for citizenship after 6 years have passed since the enactment of the law.

Another easy way to contribute to the passage of the DREAM Act:

Go to Ideas for Changing America and vote for the "Pass the DREAM Act Now" idea. And don't forget to comment on it!

Why is this important?

The "Top 10 Ideas for America" will be presented to the Obama Administration on Inauguration Day. We will then build a national campaign to advance each idea in Congress, marshaling the resources of Change.org, MySpace, and our dozens of partner organizations and millions of combined members.

Yes, you will need to create an account but it takes literally 30 seconds to do so! So to summarize this long post: visit, register, vote, comment, make a difference. Easy enough.

Update: We currently have 143 votes and are #1 on the whole site! Keep up the good work, everyone!

Obama-Biden Immigration Transition Team

The Obama-Biden transition team has released the names of two leaders working as part of the Policy Working Group on Immigration. The goal of these policy groups is to develop policy proposals and plans for the new Obama-Biden administration. This is good news for the pro-migrant movement as they are both in favor of Comprehensive Immigration Reform and seem to be very intelligent people, especially when it comes to immigration. Here's are their bios, taken from The Obama-Biden Transition Team website.

T. Alexander Aleinikoff has been Dean of the Georgetown University Law Center and Executive Vice President of Georgetown University since July 2004. He has been a member of the Georgetown faculty since 1997. Dean Aleinikoff served as General Counsel and Executive Associate Commissioner for Programs at the Immigration and Naturalization Service for several years during the Clinton Administration. From 1997 to 2004 he was a Senior Associate at the Migration Policy Institute, where he now serves on the Board of Trustees. He has written widely on immigration, refugee and citizenship law and constitutional law. Dean Aleinikoff is a graduate of Swarthmore College and Yale Law School.

Mariano-Florentino (Tino) Cuéllar is Professor and Deane F. Johnson Faculty Scholar at Stanford Law School. His work focuses on how organizations manage complex regulatory, migration, international security, and criminal justice problems. During the Clinton Administration he served at Treasury as Senior Advisor to the Under Secretary for Enforcement, where he worked on countering domestic and international financial crime, improving border coordination, and enhancing anti-corruption measures. He has served on the boards of numerous organizations, including Asylum Access and the Stanford Center for International Security and Cooperation. He has testified before Congress on immigration policy and separation of powers, and was appointed to the Silicon Valley Blue Ribbon Task Force on Aviation Security. He holds a J.D. from Yale Law School and a Ph.D. in Political Science from Stanford. He is an elected member of the American Law Institute.

Arizona Will Head Homeland Security

Arizona Demcratic Gov. Janet Napolitano has been chosen to serve as secretary of the vast and troubled Department of Homeland Security for President-elect Barack Obama, Democratic officials said. Napolitano is a border governor who will now be responsible for immigration policy and border security, which are part of Homeland Security’s myriad functions.
Napolitano brings law and order experience from her stint as the Grand Canyon State’s first female attorney general. One of the nation’s most prominent female elected officials, she made frequent appearances on behalf of Barack Obama during the campaign. She was reelected to a second four-year term in 2006.

Transition insiders have long expected that she would be offered a Cabinet slot, although she had also been mentioned for other posts, including attorney general.

Napolitano, 50, endorsed Obama in early January, just as the primaries were kicking off, and the female up-and-comer's decision to back the Illinois senator got widespread coverage.

In 2005, Time magazine named her one of America’s five best governors, calling her “A Mountaineer on the Political Rise.”

Time wrote: “The one issue Republicans think they can use against the popular Napolitano is illegal immigration, because the huge number of border crossings have left many Arizonans feeling overwhelmed and powerless. Her critics claim she came to the problem late, but she seems to have navigated it deftly. … Napolitano opposed … several bills that targeted illegal immigrants. Instead, she looked to the systems and people that make illegal immigration possible: She ordered state contractors to ensure that their employees are legal [and] set up an undercover unit to catch forgers of identity documents … In mid-August she declared a state of emergency in Arizona to direct more funds to protecting border areas from illegal crossings.”

The Democratic officials said Napolitano has not been officially offered the job but is likely to be named and to accept. The selection was first reported by CNN.

Her official bio says: “Janet Napolitano was sworn in as Arizona’s 21st governor on January 6, 2003. She is the first woman in the nation’s history to serve as U.S. Attorney, State Attorney General and Governor in immediate succession. Prior her election as Governor of Arizona, Napolitano served one term as Arizona Attorney General and four years as U.S. Attorney for the District of Arizona. Born in New York City and raised in Albuquerque, New Mexico, she is a distinguished alumna of Santa Clara University and the University of Virginia Law School. She has lived in Arizona since 1983, when she moved to Phoenix to practice law.”
Source

In-State Tuition and the DREAM Act

There has been a lot of talk about in-state tuition and the DREAM Act over at Dream Act Portal.

It seems like there's a lot of misinformation floating around, which is to be expected from the anti-immigration crowd trying to scare U.S. citizens into opposing the DREAM Act. What I'm worried about is that they will actually believe these lies without getting better informed about it.

When it comes to in-state tuition, the DREAM Act leaves it up to the state to decide whether the student will be paying in-state tuition or out-of-state tuition. Just to clarify, this is only for students who reside in that state. For example, if a student resides in PA, it is up to this state to grant the student in-state tuition or not. If, however, that student decides to go to school in TX, they will have to pay out-of-state just like any U.S. citizen.

There are some anti-immigration people who still hate the thought of an undocumented student receiving in-state tuition, regardless of where they reside. There is an excellent post by RahmanIV over at Dream Act Portal that argues this point much better than I ever could.

The argument against offering in-state tuition to undocumented children has serious flaws. First, consider all of the 10 states that offer instate tuition to undocumented students. All of these states require graduation from instate high schools and some of them actually ask for a minimum number of years of attendance. I know NY requires at least three years of attendance in a NYS-approved high school. These states also ask for residency within the state for at least six months, with some mandating a minimum of 12 months.

Why do these requirements exist? In order to answer this question, we must consider why different tuition rates exist for public schools? The reasoning behind a lower tuition for state residents is to encourage a state's educational investment in its own residents. People who have lived within a state all their lives or for long periods of time are an asset to a state's tax rolls. Such behavior is also indicative of a resident's desire to continue remaining in the state for long periods of time. Since education is the gateway to an improved standard of living, higher earnings and thus higher taxes, the state has an implicit and explicit benefit for educating these long term residents. In-state tuition is both an incentive and a reward for a long-term resident. Yes, the state taxpayer subsidizes the in-state tuition but the state has recognized that these subsidies provide a higher rate of return in increased tax rolls.

The residency and high school graduation requirements, statutorily, satisfies the state's concerns that a person will be a long-term resident within the state. Undocumented students who have lived in a state for many, many years (as many of you have), who have paid taxes (sales taxes & property taxes are the state's largest revenues) satisfy a state's concerns of a long term resident. The 10 states have formalized this understanding in offering in-state tuition to undocumented students.

Our opposition likes to argue why their children are not offered in-state tuition. If your child has been educated, long-term, in the state and attends a public university within the state, then he/she definitely qualifies for in-state tuition. States don't offer tuition subsidies to out-of-state students because they haven't proved or satisfied concerns that these students will be long term residents of the state. Additionally, you, as a out-of-state taxpayer, haven't contributed to the other state's tax rolls. And your federal taxes don't count. A state's education system is almost exclusively funded by its own tax rolls. Federal educational spending is only a small percentage of a state's educational funds.

So ALIPAC, ask yourselves this. As a taxpayer in your state, would you be willing to allow out-of-state students, who haven't lived in your state, who haven't paid taxes in your state, who haven't graduated from high school in your state, the same subsidized tuition benefits at public universities? I believe the answer is no. And if you don't believe me, then consider Americans who have second homes in other states. Do you think they like to pay taxes for the school districts of their second homes? Why should they, their children are not attending school in those districts. Would you like to pay higher taxes for the school districts of a second home?

Immigration status and in-state tuition benefits are completely irrelevant. A person's immigration status doesn't satisfy a state's concern nor is it indicative of a person's potential to be a long term resident. Past behavior, namely continued residence within the state, provides the answer. This is why, the National Council of State Legislatures and the American Federation of Teachers support the DREAM Act.

Since in-state tuition has been excluded from the DREAM Act, ask your Senators and Representatives to go further and mandate that all states provide in-state tuition benefits to all citizens, regardless of their residence in the state. We'll just sit back and watch the national fury over why an American taxpayer should subsidize the education of another state's resident.

Thanks RahmanIV!