Official seeks survey of illegal immigrant students
May 2, 2008 Washington Times
By Tom LoBianco - A Frederick County, Maryland, commissioner wants the school board to survey the number of illegal immigrants who are students and has proposed withholding school funding if members fail to agree.
"It would be useful information because that would indicate the extent of public funds that are being used to educate those who are not in the country legally," County Commissioner John L. "Lennie " Thompson Jr. said yesterday.
Federal law bars school systems from inquiring after a students' immigration status.
However, Mr. Thompson said his proposal asks only for a review of student files and that he has never even "contemplated" an inquiry of students or their parents.
The proposal has rankled school board members who question the legality of Mr. Thompson's proposal.
"The fact is that federal law requires that all children be educated in the public schools of the United States, regardless of their immigration status or the immigration status of their parents," board member Kathryn B. "Katie" Groth said. "Further, the law prohibits public schools from inquiring about immigration status of students and their families. In other words, we in the public school system do not, and in fact cannot, collect such information from students and their families."
A Maryland Department of Education spokeswoman also said it is illegal for school systems to question a student's immigration status.
This is not the first time Mr. Thompson and other Republican lawmakers in largely conservative Western Maryland have proposed aggressive measures against the wave of illegal immigration.
Mr. Thompson recently supported a resolution asking state lawmakers to call for a national Constitutional Convention to address the issue of illegal immigration.
In addition, County Commissioner Charles A. Jenkins last week attempted to make English the only language used in county documents. Commissioners instead stripped his proposal and made English the "primary" language of Frederick County.
Mr. Thompson said he has been forced into such action because state and federal officials have not taken action.
Of the dozens of bills proposed in the 2008 General Assembly session to aid or crack down on illegal immigrants, the Democrat-controlled legislature passed one. Congress also has failed to agree on an immigration policy.
The county commissioners and school board members are scheduled to consider Mr. Thompson's request at a joint May 20 meeting.
Jan H. Gardner, president of the Board of County Commissioners, already opposes the plan.
"Since the county commissioners fund over half of the school system's budget, [Mr.] Thompson is effectively proposing to compromise the education of all the students in the school system in his quest for this information." she said.
Mr. Thompson acknowledged that immigration is an issue better handled by federal authorities but said it must be "solved from the grassroots up."
Showing posts with label DREAM ACT Students. Show all posts
Showing posts with label DREAM ACT Students. Show all posts
Tuesday, May 6, 2008
Looking for DREAMERS in Frederick County, Maryland
-----
Saturday, February 2, 2008
A word on political opinions
As I am posting articles from different newspapers about the 2008 presidential candidates I am very aware that I am not actually able to technically endorse anyone. I work for a large, public university, and even though tenure does allow for free speech, it would not be in the university's best interest for me to endorse one candidate or another. In addition, my writing does not reflect the intentions and opinions of my employer.
My main objective is for the reader to question and analyze what is being publicized regarding immigration, the 2008 presidential election, and general issues of social justice around the world. My heart is really with the DREAMERS (undocumented college students), but the reality is that their struggles are tightly interwoven with other national and world events such as globalization, political candidacies, economic disruption, and human rights issues - to understand the DREAMERS we need to know about many other things.
My main objective is for the reader to question and analyze what is being publicized regarding immigration, the 2008 presidential election, and general issues of social justice around the world. My heart is really with the DREAMERS (undocumented college students), but the reality is that their struggles are tightly interwoven with other national and world events such as globalization, political candidacies, economic disruption, and human rights issues - to understand the DREAMERS we need to know about many other things.
Thursday, November 22, 2007
When Being Called Crazy is a Compliment
Perhaps it is a compliment that O'Reilly called Oppenheimer a "crazy columnist." I'm not saying I agree with O'Reilly. However, if Oppenheimer's column is being noticed by the xenophobes, that means it must be pretty good and they must be concerned about it's impact.
Another thing... I think O'Reilly and Dobbs are not the most logical or reasonable people (maybe missing some nuts and bolts in their brains). Their character judgement is not very reliable. I think I'd be afraid to be called normal by these guys.
Now, as for Oppenheimer's opinion on the future of the DREAMERS. If the DREAM ACT does not pass, it's possible that these kids will become part of the underclass. I would say they probably won't, but their children will.
As in the history of Mexican Americans in the southwest, people weren't allowed to go to high school or couldn't because of the harvest schedule (la cosecha). They still worked hard and lived as good citizens. Unfortunately many of the next generations have found that being a gang member feels more inclusive than being a college student.
As I mentioned in a previous post (November 8, 2007 "Oppenheimer on the DREAM ACT") there won't be a riot. DREAMERS would become parents who would mourn their lost opportunities... with their children carrying the burden in other ways.
http://www.miamiherald.com/519/story/308401.html
Another thing... I think O'Reilly and Dobbs are not the most logical or reasonable people (maybe missing some nuts and bolts in their brains). Their character judgement is not very reliable. I think I'd be afraid to be called normal by these guys.
Now, as for Oppenheimer's opinion on the future of the DREAMERS. If the DREAM ACT does not pass, it's possible that these kids will become part of the underclass. I would say they probably won't, but their children will.
As in the history of Mexican Americans in the southwest, people weren't allowed to go to high school or couldn't because of the harvest schedule (la cosecha). They still worked hard and lived as good citizens. Unfortunately many of the next generations have found that being a gang member feels more inclusive than being a college student.
As I mentioned in a previous post (November 8, 2007 "Oppenheimer on the DREAM ACT") there won't be a riot. DREAMERS would become parents who would mourn their lost opportunities... with their children carrying the burden in other ways.
THE OPPENHEIMER REPORT
Who's crazy, me or O'Reilly?
Posted on Thu, Nov. 15, 2007
By ANDRES OPPENHEIMER
aoppenheimer@MiamiHerald.com
On Nov. 8, I had the distinction of being called ''a crazy columnist'' and a ''nut'' on prime time television by conservative Fox News anchorman Bill O'Reilly for a column I had written about the urgent need for a comprehensive solution to America's immigration crisis.
I'm not going to disqualify O'Reilly -- or the CNN anti-immigration crusader Lou Dobbs -- as a Hispanic-phobic hate monger. Rather than trying to smear him, as O'Reilly did to me, I will focus on how deceiving his arguments are. You judge.
DANGEROUS TREND
First, the facts. In my Nov. 4 column, ''Angry migrant underclass might erupt in U.S.,'' I argued that the rapid escalation of the U.S. anti-immigration hysteria is a dangerous trend. It will create an underclass of nearly 13 million people who won't leave this country, who can't realistically be deported and who -- if deprived of a path to earned legalization -- will become increasingly frustrated and angry, I said.
I even used the word ''intifada'' -- granted, I wanted to grab your attention, to describe the worst case scenario of what could happen if undocumented immigrants are given absolutely no legal path to earned upward mobility. In that context, I cited the examples of the Palestinian youths' riots in Israel in the 1990s and the 2005 riots by Muslim youths in the suburbs of Paris.
My main point was that the estimated 1.8 million U.S.-raised undocumented youths -- who were brought to this country as toddlers, often speak no other language than English and don't even remember their countries of origin -- will soon be thrown into the U.S. labor market with zero chances of getting a legal job.
What is going to happen with these youths? Most are barred from applying for in-state college tuition and will grow up on the streets. Many of them will join the gangs that are already terrorizing many U.S. cities. Undocumented kids, especially the brightest ones, need to be given an opportunity to gain U.S. citizenship, as was contemplated in the Dream Act that was recently defeated in the U.S. Senate.
As soon as my column was published, I was flooded with e-mails from all over the country. By Wednesday, MiamiHerald.com website had a whopping 93 pages of comments on the column. Many of them were openly hostile against Hispanic immigrants and claimed -- wrongly -- that my column was inciting violence.
`CRAZY COLUMNIST'
On Nov. 8, O'Reilly said in an on-air conversation with Fox News analyst Laura Ingraham that ``there is a crazy columnist in Miami, Miami Herald, who says that the Hispanics are going to rise up.''
Ingraham said I was ''intimating something akin, Bill, to a race war . . . It's insane.'' He responded, ''He's a nut. He's a nut, this guy.'' She added that I am part of ''a crazy far-left anarchist wing'' of the immigration debate.
My opinion: For the record, I never called for violence, nor would I. Suggesting that I was endorsing violence, as was done in the O'Reilly show, is irresponsible journalism.
But even more irresponsible is what O'Reilly and other cable television anti-immigration crusaders are doing every day: inciting Americans to rebel against ''illegal immigrants'' -- most of whom are Hispanic -- without offering any realistic solutions to America's immigration problem.
As long as the income gap between the United States and Latin America continues to be as wide as it is, as long as U.S. employers keep welcoming undocumented immigrants to do low-paid work and as long as U.S. consumers continue to prefer paying less for services performed by undocumented workers, the immigration flow will continue, no matter how many stretches of fence we place along the 2,000-mile border.
If we want to reduce illegal immigration, we will have to allow greater legal immigration and at the same time increase economic ties with Latin America to help our neighbors grow and reduce their people's pressures to emigrate.
Above all, we need to give the 1.8 million U.S.-raised undocumented children an earned path to legalization. Otherwise, we will be creating an underclass of social pariahs, many of whom will end up joining street gangs.
Are these fears crazy? Am I nuts? You decide.
http://www.miamiherald.com/519/story/308401.html
Thursday, November 1, 2007
Colleges as Immigration Enforcers
Arizona State University is in a predicament as are many other high ed. institutions around the country... and DREAM ACT students are caught in the middle.
-----
Arizona's Colleges Are in the Crosshairs of Efforts to Curb
Illegal Immigration
Sara Hebel,
Chronicle of Higher Education
November 2, 2007,
Arizona's strict new limits on educational benefits for undocumented
immigrants that took effect at the beginning of this year have brought
new scrutiny to the state's colleges and their students and forced
educators to assume an awkward role as enforcers.
In the wake of a ballot measure that nearly three quarters of Arizona
voters approved a year ago, officials at the state's community colleges,
universities, and Education Department have redirected thousands of
students and adult learners who are not legal residents of the United
States to privately financed scholarships and education programs. The
new law prevents those individuals from paying lower, in-state tuition,
receiving state financial aid, or enrolling in the state's
adult-education classes.
The institutions also have spent thousands of dollars revamping their
admissions and registration processes to meet the new law's requirements
that they begin to document their students' residency status and keep
track of how many people cannot verify they are living in the country
legally.
Michael M. Crow, president of Arizona State University, says
institutions are in a "difficult position" in the state's immigration
debate. As colleges put in place the requirements of the new law, known
as Proposition 300, he says, they are honoring their core educational
mission by working to help immigrant students struggling to pay the
higher tuition that the law requires such institutions to charge. At the
same time, college officials also know that a large number of state
residents would rather these immigrants be deported than enrolled in the
state's universities at all.
Other States Have Immigration Laws
Without federal action on broad immigration reforms, states like Arizona
are passing their own laws to try to deal with the growing number of
illegal immigrants who are arriving in their towns and to respond to the
urgent debates about what public resources should be available to those
immigrants. Ten states have enacted laws to specifically allow some
illegal immigrants who are graduates of state high schools to pay
in-state tuition at public colleges. (One state, Oklahoma, has repealed
its law, although some illegal immigrants will still be eligible for the
cheaper rates under the state regents' policy.)
Advocates of the approach argue that helping these students obtain a
higher education will pay economic dividends by training people who have
grown up in the United States to become part of a better-educated work
force.
Taking a different approach, Georgia has enacted a law that its colleges
believe prevents them from charging in-state tuition to any illegal
immigrants. The restrictions on educational benefits in Arizona, where
an estimated half-million undocumented immigrants live, are among the
broadest. Advocates of these policies say taxpayers should not have to
subsidize the higher education of individuals who have violated U.S.
immigration law.
During the first six months the Arizona law was in effect, more than
4,600 people in Arizona were denied state-based financial aid, prevented
from paying cheaper in-state tuition, or rejected from adult-education
classes, according to a report released this summer by the state's Joint
Legislative Budget Committee.
Colleges have no way of knowing how many other potential students did
not even show up at their doors because of the new law. But at the
state's largest community-college district, Maricopa, enrollment dipped
by 3 percent this fall, even though the region's population is growing.
Administrators believe the drop is due, at least in part, to Proposition
300.
"There are a lot of good students who have been impacted by this," says
Mary Lou Massal, dean of enrollment services at Glendale Community
College, which is part of the Maricopa district. She says her college,
for instance, can no longer provide state financial aid to help some
immigrant students who have participated in the institution's honors
program and a bridge program that helps prepare high-school students for
college.
Proposition 300 also has further complicated an already-complex mix of
state and federal laws on education and immigration, Mr. Crow says, that
leave institutions trying to respond to policies that seem to be at odds
with one other.
Arizona's Constitution, for instance, requires the state to educate
every child from the age of six to 21. The U.S. Supreme Court has also
ruled that public elementary and secondary schools must enroll all
children, regardless of immigration status. And the state's Board of
Regents requires that Arizona's three public universities admit all
applicants who meet certain academic criteria.
Now Proposition 300 adds another wrinkle by making it more difficult for
some of those qualified students who have attended the state's public
schools to afford to attend Arizona's colleges.
"For us," Mr. Crow says, "it's confusing."
Monitoring Private Donations
The new law also has brought greater scrutiny to university operations.
Dean Martin, who was the lead sponsor of Proposition 300 and is now the
state's treasurer, wants to ensure that the state's institutions are not
violating the new law by using public resources when their foundations
award privately financed scholarships to illegal immigrants, who now
face tuition that is more than three times as high as that of in-state
students.
Mr. Martin says he learned earlier this fall that Arizona State may have
used a process that violated the law as the university's foundation gave
out nearly $2-million in private scholarships to about 200 undocumented
students.
If employees of the university have any say in awarding the aid to
specific undocumented immigrants, Mr. Martin says, that would be
illegal, even though all of the foundation funds came from private
sources. That is because foundation funds would become public money if
they are deposited in university accounts before they are allocated to
students. He has asked the state's Board of Regents to investigate what
public universities are doing and to establish procedures for the
institutions to follow.
"My interest is less in saying 'I gotcha,' but rather in making sure
that everyone follows not only the letter but the spirit of the law,"
Mr. Martin says, especially since the ballot measure passed by such a
wide margin.
After local newspapers reported that funds from Arizona State's
foundation were going to support undocumented students, and that public
funds may have been involved in administering the aid, Mr. Martin says
his office was flooded with hundreds of calls, including about a dozen
from donors to the university who "were very upset."
But Mr. Crow says he does not know of a single donor who has called the
university to complain, though he says various other members of the
public have expressed their unhappiness that scholarships, even private
ones, go to undocumented immigrants.
Mr. Crow also says the university and its foundation have been following
the law in how they distribute scholarships. University officials
provide a list of students with financial need to the foundation, and
then the foundation alone decides who will receive the scholarships, he
says. Many undocumented immigrants have risen to the top of that list
and are receiving the private aid because they need aid more now that
they are charged out-of-state rates, he adds.
This fall, full-time in-state undergraduates pay close to $2,500 per
semester at Arizona State, while students considered to come from out of
state have to pay just over $8,500 per semester.
Community Colleges Reach Out
Elsewhere, Maricopa Community College officials also direct undocumented
students to the district's foundation to apply for scholarships that are
financed by private foundations and individual donors.
Steve Schenk, chief executive officer of the Maricopa Community Colleges
Foundation, says the foundation has long had some donors who have
specified that they want their money to be given only to U.S. citizens.
But he says no additional donors have put that restriction on their
gifts since Proposition 300 was passed.
In fact, in the wake of Proposition 300, he says, he has heard from a
handful of foundations and individuals who have specifically said they
want their money to go to help undocumented students.
Across the Maricopa district, which enrolls about 170,000 students at 10
institutions, the number of students who are counted as coming from out
of state more than doubled, to 11,000 this fall from 4,800 a year ago.
Officials say they believe Proposition 300 played a significant role.
Ms. Massal of Glendale Community College says her institution has
actively sought to reach out to students who were likely to be subject
to the new restrictions to encourage them to enroll and make them aware
of how they could reduce their tuition bills.
The college held informational forums about the law and called many
individuals, including students who were enrolled in
English-as-a-second-language classes and who were identified by groups
that serve the Hispanic community.
Some students were not aware that they could still enroll at all, Ms.
Massal says, and many others did not know they had options to reduce
costs, such as by taking fewer courses. At Maricopa district colleges,
students who are classified as out-of-state pay $90 per credit hour if
they take less than seven credits in a semester and $280 per credit hour
if they take seven or more. In-state students pay $65 per credit hour.
Meanwhile, at Arizona's Department of Education, officials are sending
some of the more than 1,400 adults, or about 12 percent of applicants,
who are blocked from the department's courses because of their
immigration status to private programs. In the aftermath of Proposition
300, more churches and other community groups are starting to offer
literacy, English-language, and other classes, says Karen Liersch, state
director of adult education services.
She is worried about what the effects of Proposition 300 will be in a
state where more than one in four people speak a language other than
English at home and more than 16 percent of people 25 years and older
have not completed high school.
"There is a big need for adult literacy," she says. "It's important for
the Arizona economy and the Arizona work force."
She and other educators in the state still hope that Congress will
eventually enact new federal laws to lessen the pressure on states and
their institutions to figure out how to respond to the constant flow of
people coming across their borders.
"The federal government is not doing its job," says Fred Boice,
president of the Arizona Board of Regents. As a result, he says, Arizona
voters obviously felt they needed to take control.
"To punish college students seems pretty severe," he says of how Arizona
residents responded in crafting Proposition 300. "But, in my view, it
was a frustration measure."
http://chronicle.com
Section: Government & Politics
Volume 54, Issue 10, Page A15
http://chronicle.com/temp/email2.php?id=sgcQdmdjhzgywrYgzmNGmf4gTwx5KJXs
-----
Arizona's Colleges Are in the Crosshairs of Efforts to Curb
Illegal Immigration
Sara Hebel,
Chronicle of Higher Education
November 2, 2007,
Arizona's strict new limits on educational benefits for undocumented
immigrants that took effect at the beginning of this year have brought
new scrutiny to the state's colleges and their students and forced
educators to assume an awkward role as enforcers.
In the wake of a ballot measure that nearly three quarters of Arizona
voters approved a year ago, officials at the state's community colleges,
universities, and Education Department have redirected thousands of
students and adult learners who are not legal residents of the United
States to privately financed scholarships and education programs. The
new law prevents those individuals from paying lower, in-state tuition,
receiving state financial aid, or enrolling in the state's
adult-education classes.
The institutions also have spent thousands of dollars revamping their
admissions and registration processes to meet the new law's requirements
that they begin to document their students' residency status and keep
track of how many people cannot verify they are living in the country
legally.
Michael M. Crow, president of Arizona State University, says
institutions are in a "difficult position" in the state's immigration
debate. As colleges put in place the requirements of the new law, known
as Proposition 300, he says, they are honoring their core educational
mission by working to help immigrant students struggling to pay the
higher tuition that the law requires such institutions to charge. At the
same time, college officials also know that a large number of state
residents would rather these immigrants be deported than enrolled in the
state's universities at all.
Other States Have Immigration Laws
Without federal action on broad immigration reforms, states like Arizona
are passing their own laws to try to deal with the growing number of
illegal immigrants who are arriving in their towns and to respond to the
urgent debates about what public resources should be available to those
immigrants. Ten states have enacted laws to specifically allow some
illegal immigrants who are graduates of state high schools to pay
in-state tuition at public colleges. (One state, Oklahoma, has repealed
its law, although some illegal immigrants will still be eligible for the
cheaper rates under the state regents' policy.)
Advocates of the approach argue that helping these students obtain a
higher education will pay economic dividends by training people who have
grown up in the United States to become part of a better-educated work
force.
Taking a different approach, Georgia has enacted a law that its colleges
believe prevents them from charging in-state tuition to any illegal
immigrants. The restrictions on educational benefits in Arizona, where
an estimated half-million undocumented immigrants live, are among the
broadest. Advocates of these policies say taxpayers should not have to
subsidize the higher education of individuals who have violated U.S.
immigration law.
During the first six months the Arizona law was in effect, more than
4,600 people in Arizona were denied state-based financial aid, prevented
from paying cheaper in-state tuition, or rejected from adult-education
classes, according to a report released this summer by the state's Joint
Legislative Budget Committee.
Colleges have no way of knowing how many other potential students did
not even show up at their doors because of the new law. But at the
state's largest community-college district, Maricopa, enrollment dipped
by 3 percent this fall, even though the region's population is growing.
Administrators believe the drop is due, at least in part, to Proposition
300.
"There are a lot of good students who have been impacted by this," says
Mary Lou Massal, dean of enrollment services at Glendale Community
College, which is part of the Maricopa district. She says her college,
for instance, can no longer provide state financial aid to help some
immigrant students who have participated in the institution's honors
program and a bridge program that helps prepare high-school students for
college.
Proposition 300 also has further complicated an already-complex mix of
state and federal laws on education and immigration, Mr. Crow says, that
leave institutions trying to respond to policies that seem to be at odds
with one other.
Arizona's Constitution, for instance, requires the state to educate
every child from the age of six to 21. The U.S. Supreme Court has also
ruled that public elementary and secondary schools must enroll all
children, regardless of immigration status. And the state's Board of
Regents requires that Arizona's three public universities admit all
applicants who meet certain academic criteria.
Now Proposition 300 adds another wrinkle by making it more difficult for
some of those qualified students who have attended the state's public
schools to afford to attend Arizona's colleges.
"For us," Mr. Crow says, "it's confusing."
Monitoring Private Donations
The new law also has brought greater scrutiny to university operations.
Dean Martin, who was the lead sponsor of Proposition 300 and is now the
state's treasurer, wants to ensure that the state's institutions are not
violating the new law by using public resources when their foundations
award privately financed scholarships to illegal immigrants, who now
face tuition that is more than three times as high as that of in-state
students.
Mr. Martin says he learned earlier this fall that Arizona State may have
used a process that violated the law as the university's foundation gave
out nearly $2-million in private scholarships to about 200 undocumented
students.
If employees of the university have any say in awarding the aid to
specific undocumented immigrants, Mr. Martin says, that would be
illegal, even though all of the foundation funds came from private
sources. That is because foundation funds would become public money if
they are deposited in university accounts before they are allocated to
students. He has asked the state's Board of Regents to investigate what
public universities are doing and to establish procedures for the
institutions to follow.
"My interest is less in saying 'I gotcha,' but rather in making sure
that everyone follows not only the letter but the spirit of the law,"
Mr. Martin says, especially since the ballot measure passed by such a
wide margin.
After local newspapers reported that funds from Arizona State's
foundation were going to support undocumented students, and that public
funds may have been involved in administering the aid, Mr. Martin says
his office was flooded with hundreds of calls, including about a dozen
from donors to the university who "were very upset."
But Mr. Crow says he does not know of a single donor who has called the
university to complain, though he says various other members of the
public have expressed their unhappiness that scholarships, even private
ones, go to undocumented immigrants.
Mr. Crow also says the university and its foundation have been following
the law in how they distribute scholarships. University officials
provide a list of students with financial need to the foundation, and
then the foundation alone decides who will receive the scholarships, he
says. Many undocumented immigrants have risen to the top of that list
and are receiving the private aid because they need aid more now that
they are charged out-of-state rates, he adds.
This fall, full-time in-state undergraduates pay close to $2,500 per
semester at Arizona State, while students considered to come from out of
state have to pay just over $8,500 per semester.
Community Colleges Reach Out
Elsewhere, Maricopa Community College officials also direct undocumented
students to the district's foundation to apply for scholarships that are
financed by private foundations and individual donors.
Steve Schenk, chief executive officer of the Maricopa Community Colleges
Foundation, says the foundation has long had some donors who have
specified that they want their money to be given only to U.S. citizens.
But he says no additional donors have put that restriction on their
gifts since Proposition 300 was passed.
In fact, in the wake of Proposition 300, he says, he has heard from a
handful of foundations and individuals who have specifically said they
want their money to go to help undocumented students.
Across the Maricopa district, which enrolls about 170,000 students at 10
institutions, the number of students who are counted as coming from out
of state more than doubled, to 11,000 this fall from 4,800 a year ago.
Officials say they believe Proposition 300 played a significant role.
Ms. Massal of Glendale Community College says her institution has
actively sought to reach out to students who were likely to be subject
to the new restrictions to encourage them to enroll and make them aware
of how they could reduce their tuition bills.
The college held informational forums about the law and called many
individuals, including students who were enrolled in
English-as-a-second-language classes and who were identified by groups
that serve the Hispanic community.
Some students were not aware that they could still enroll at all, Ms.
Massal says, and many others did not know they had options to reduce
costs, such as by taking fewer courses. At Maricopa district colleges,
students who are classified as out-of-state pay $90 per credit hour if
they take less than seven credits in a semester and $280 per credit hour
if they take seven or more. In-state students pay $65 per credit hour.
Meanwhile, at Arizona's Department of Education, officials are sending
some of the more than 1,400 adults, or about 12 percent of applicants,
who are blocked from the department's courses because of their
immigration status to private programs. In the aftermath of Proposition
300, more churches and other community groups are starting to offer
literacy, English-language, and other classes, says Karen Liersch, state
director of adult education services.
She is worried about what the effects of Proposition 300 will be in a
state where more than one in four people speak a language other than
English at home and more than 16 percent of people 25 years and older
have not completed high school.
"There is a big need for adult literacy," she says. "It's important for
the Arizona economy and the Arizona work force."
She and other educators in the state still hope that Congress will
eventually enact new federal laws to lessen the pressure on states and
their institutions to figure out how to respond to the constant flow of
people coming across their borders.
"The federal government is not doing its job," says Fred Boice,
president of the Arizona Board of Regents. As a result, he says, Arizona
voters obviously felt they needed to take control.
"To punish college students seems pretty severe," he says of how Arizona
residents responded in crafting Proposition 300. "But, in my view, it
was a frustration measure."
http://chronicle.com
Section: Government & Politics
Volume 54, Issue 10, Page A15
http://chronicle.com/temp/email2.php?id=sgcQdmdjhzgywrYgzmNGmf4gTwx5KJXs
Friday, October 26, 2007
SF Chronicle on Lost DREAM ACT Vote
The San Francisco Chronicle is saying that the new blue card in the European Union will welcome DREAM ACT graduates. However a BBC article states the graduates need 3 years professional experience, which is impossible to obtain if the DREAMERS are in the U.S.
'[U.S.] Technology lobbyists pointed with alarm at the decision this week by the European Union to offer legal status to educated immigrants in information technology and other skilled fields with a new blue card explicitly designed to divert such workers to Europe from the United States.
"The EU is saying, 'We're coming for your students. We know the U.S. produces the best math and science students coming out of college. And we're going to come get them,' " said Robert Hoffman, vice president for government and public affairs at Oracle, the Redwood Shores software giant.'
Otherwise the SFC tells just about the same story as all the other papers on the loss of the DREAM ACT
___
San Francisco Chronicle
October 25, 2007
(10-25) 04:00 PDT Washington- -- The Senate killed help Wednesday for the single most sympathetic group of illegal immigrants - those who were brought to the country as children and now wish to go to college or join the military - and seemed to dash the hopes of Silicon Valley technology companies and California farmers for more immigrant workers they say they desperately need.
The DREAM Act, sponsored by Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., would have provided a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants who were brought to the country as children, live here more than five consecutive years and complete two years of college or military service. The bill, which goes by its acronym and is named the Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors Act, received a 52-44 majority, but that was far short of the 60 votes needed to overcome a filibuster.
The vote split both parties: It was backed by 12 Republicans, but opposed by eight Democrats. California Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein voted for the bill; Sen. Barbara Boxer, also a Democrat, was touring the fire zone in California and missed the vote.
The legislation was the first major attempt since a broad immigration bill crashed in the Senate last June to split off elements that have significant support - without granting legal status to all of the estimated 12 million people living in the country illegally.
The University of California had pushed hard for the bill, with a plea from UC Berkeley Chancellor Robert Birgeneau and news conferences with UC students caught in immigration limbo.
Anti-illegal immigration activists mobilized too, deriding the legislation as the nightmare act and stealth amnesty and warning that the measure would trigger a chain migration of sponsored relatives. Supporters vigorously denied those charges.
Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., went so far as to call for federal agents to round up illegal college students who lobbied for the bill.
Instead of gaining ground, the DREAM Act fractured the unlikely coalition of business and immigrant rights groups that had united earlier this year behind broader immigration overhaul legislation.
Durbin, the second-ranking Democrat in the Senate, conceded that with an election next year and anti-immigrant sentiment increasing, further efforts at immigration reform are probably doomed. That would include the so-called AgJobs bill to provide temporary permits for farmworkers that Feinstein had hoped to push through this year.
It also hampers recent efforts by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-San Francisco, to respond to a rising clamor from farms, resorts, high-tech companies, nursing homes and dozens of other industries that say they need workers, and immigrant rights groups who say illegal immigrants are being targeted by federal agents and local and state governments.
The moderate New Democrat Coalition, chaired by Rep. Ellen Tauscher of Walnut Creek, wrote Pelosi on Monday urging action on visas for scientists, mathematicians and engineers, warning that U.S. competitiveness is at stake. But objections arose from other Democrats wanting relief for illegal immigrants.
At the same time, Rep. Rahm Emanuel, D-Ill., one of Pelosi's top political lieutenants, was quoted as saying immigration "has emerged as the third rail of American politics, and anyone who doesn't realize that isn't with the American people."
Technology lobbyists pointed with alarm at the decision this week by the European Union to offer legal status to educated immigrants in information technology and other skilled fields with a new blue card explicitly designed to divert such workers to Europe from the United States.
"The EU is saying, 'We're coming for your students. We know the U.S. produces the best math and science students coming out of college. And we're going to come get them,' " said Robert Hoffman, vice president for government and public affairs at Oracle, the Redwood Shores software giant.
Behind the scenes, business and immigrant rights groups blamed each other for the meltdown - and are refusing to back each other's legislation if they can't attach their own.
Durbin made an impassioned plea for young illegal immigrants who were raised in this country and know no other home yet cannot get permission to work or go to college. He said there is sentiment among Democrats that business groups should not come asking for more workers if they refuse to support such strivers who are already here.
"If we're going to tell these children to leave, that we don't need them, we don't need their talent, we don't need their education, how can you make an argument that we need to bring in more foreign talent to America?" Durbin said.
Technology lobbyists said they have never opposed the DREAM Act and accused Durbin of trying to kill expanded immigration benefits for high skilled legal immigrants at every turn.
"We've always believed we have anywhere from 80 to 90 votes in the U.S. Senate for high skilled immigration," and an equally overwhelming majority in the House, said Ralph Hellman, a top lobbyist with the Information Technology Industry Council. Hellman drew a sharp distinction between expansion of visas for legal immigrants, such as skilled workers on H-1B visas, and illegal immigrants.
"People have always used our issue in legal immigration as sweeteners to get their issue across the finish line. ...We have been a political football for three years on immigration, and we're tired of it," Hellman said. "Given what has happened in the EU, our competitors are going to lap us."
H-1B temporary visas for skilled workers are now running out the first day they are issued, and tech companies say they need them to attract foreign students who have earned math, science and engineering degrees from U.S. universities. Skilled H-1B workers who wish to remain in the United States also face a growing backlog for green cards that grant permanent resident status.
California farmers say the crackdown on the border with Mexico is preventing workers from coming north, and they face the prospect of rotting crops or moving their operations to Mexico.
Doris Meissner, chief of the federal immigration service under President Bill Clinton, who is now at the Migration Policy Institute, said the failure of the DREAM Act "certainly says the piecemeal approach is failing. Whether it means nothing will happen on something like H-1Bs, I don't know. H-1B has a very well organized lobby and it deals with changes in the legal immigration system. The DREAM Act and AgJobs and other things that fall into the realm of being branded amnesty are the ones that really just don't have any legs right now."
E-mail Carolyn Lochhead at clochhead@sfchronicle.com.
'[U.S.] Technology lobbyists pointed with alarm at the decision this week by the European Union to offer legal status to educated immigrants in information technology and other skilled fields with a new blue card explicitly designed to divert such workers to Europe from the United States.
"The EU is saying, 'We're coming for your students. We know the U.S. produces the best math and science students coming out of college. And we're going to come get them,' " said Robert Hoffman, vice president for government and public affairs at Oracle, the Redwood Shores software giant.'
Otherwise the SFC tells just about the same story as all the other papers on the loss of the DREAM ACT
___
San Francisco Chronicle
October 25, 2007
(10-25) 04:00 PDT Washington- -- The Senate killed help Wednesday for the single most sympathetic group of illegal immigrants - those who were brought to the country as children and now wish to go to college or join the military - and seemed to dash the hopes of Silicon Valley technology companies and California farmers for more immigrant workers they say they desperately need.
The DREAM Act, sponsored by Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., would have provided a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants who were brought to the country as children, live here more than five consecutive years and complete two years of college or military service. The bill, which goes by its acronym and is named the Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors Act, received a 52-44 majority, but that was far short of the 60 votes needed to overcome a filibuster.
The vote split both parties: It was backed by 12 Republicans, but opposed by eight Democrats. California Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein voted for the bill; Sen. Barbara Boxer, also a Democrat, was touring the fire zone in California and missed the vote.
The legislation was the first major attempt since a broad immigration bill crashed in the Senate last June to split off elements that have significant support - without granting legal status to all of the estimated 12 million people living in the country illegally.
The University of California had pushed hard for the bill, with a plea from UC Berkeley Chancellor Robert Birgeneau and news conferences with UC students caught in immigration limbo.
Anti-illegal immigration activists mobilized too, deriding the legislation as the nightmare act and stealth amnesty and warning that the measure would trigger a chain migration of sponsored relatives. Supporters vigorously denied those charges.
Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., went so far as to call for federal agents to round up illegal college students who lobbied for the bill.
Instead of gaining ground, the DREAM Act fractured the unlikely coalition of business and immigrant rights groups that had united earlier this year behind broader immigration overhaul legislation.
Durbin, the second-ranking Democrat in the Senate, conceded that with an election next year and anti-immigrant sentiment increasing, further efforts at immigration reform are probably doomed. That would include the so-called AgJobs bill to provide temporary permits for farmworkers that Feinstein had hoped to push through this year.
It also hampers recent efforts by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-San Francisco, to respond to a rising clamor from farms, resorts, high-tech companies, nursing homes and dozens of other industries that say they need workers, and immigrant rights groups who say illegal immigrants are being targeted by federal agents and local and state governments.
The moderate New Democrat Coalition, chaired by Rep. Ellen Tauscher of Walnut Creek, wrote Pelosi on Monday urging action on visas for scientists, mathematicians and engineers, warning that U.S. competitiveness is at stake. But objections arose from other Democrats wanting relief for illegal immigrants.
At the same time, Rep. Rahm Emanuel, D-Ill., one of Pelosi's top political lieutenants, was quoted as saying immigration "has emerged as the third rail of American politics, and anyone who doesn't realize that isn't with the American people."
Technology lobbyists pointed with alarm at the decision this week by the European Union to offer legal status to educated immigrants in information technology and other skilled fields with a new blue card explicitly designed to divert such workers to Europe from the United States.
"The EU is saying, 'We're coming for your students. We know the U.S. produces the best math and science students coming out of college. And we're going to come get them,' " said Robert Hoffman, vice president for government and public affairs at Oracle, the Redwood Shores software giant.
Behind the scenes, business and immigrant rights groups blamed each other for the meltdown - and are refusing to back each other's legislation if they can't attach their own.
Durbin made an impassioned plea for young illegal immigrants who were raised in this country and know no other home yet cannot get permission to work or go to college. He said there is sentiment among Democrats that business groups should not come asking for more workers if they refuse to support such strivers who are already here.
"If we're going to tell these children to leave, that we don't need them, we don't need their talent, we don't need their education, how can you make an argument that we need to bring in more foreign talent to America?" Durbin said.
Technology lobbyists said they have never opposed the DREAM Act and accused Durbin of trying to kill expanded immigration benefits for high skilled legal immigrants at every turn.
"We've always believed we have anywhere from 80 to 90 votes in the U.S. Senate for high skilled immigration," and an equally overwhelming majority in the House, said Ralph Hellman, a top lobbyist with the Information Technology Industry Council. Hellman drew a sharp distinction between expansion of visas for legal immigrants, such as skilled workers on H-1B visas, and illegal immigrants.
"People have always used our issue in legal immigration as sweeteners to get their issue across the finish line. ...We have been a political football for three years on immigration, and we're tired of it," Hellman said. "Given what has happened in the EU, our competitors are going to lap us."
H-1B temporary visas for skilled workers are now running out the first day they are issued, and tech companies say they need them to attract foreign students who have earned math, science and engineering degrees from U.S. universities. Skilled H-1B workers who wish to remain in the United States also face a growing backlog for green cards that grant permanent resident status.
California farmers say the crackdown on the border with Mexico is preventing workers from coming north, and they face the prospect of rotting crops or moving their operations to Mexico.
Doris Meissner, chief of the federal immigration service under President Bill Clinton, who is now at the Migration Policy Institute, said the failure of the DREAM Act "certainly says the piecemeal approach is failing. Whether it means nothing will happen on something like H-1Bs, I don't know. H-1B has a very well organized lobby and it deals with changes in the legal immigration system. The DREAM Act and AgJobs and other things that fall into the realm of being branded amnesty are the ones that really just don't have any legs right now."
E-mail Carolyn Lochhead at clochhead@sfchronicle.com.
Thursday, October 18, 2007
How About DREAM ACT Engineering Students?
This article on how the federal government should promote "free flow of scientific knowledge" reminds me of the kids who went to Toronto for a robotics competition - won and then were detained when crossing back into the United States. Of course the U.S. is beginning to lag behind in the sciences.
How perverse is it to have the students right here in the U.S., educated in U.S. colleges and universities - while not being able to use their talents while helping the U.S. with its technology gap?
-----
Experts Urge Exchange of Scientific Talent
By REUTERS
Published: October 19, 2007
New York Times
WASHINGTON, Oct. 18 (Reuters) — The federal government should create a commission to promote the free flow of scientific knowledge and researchers from other countries while balancing the threat from enemies, an expert panel said Thursday.
The panel, appointed by the National Research Council, which provides advice to American policymakers, said colleges and research institutions must continue to bring in foreign science and engineering students. “The global scientific enterprise thrives on the movement of students and scholars across borders and among institutions,” it said in a report.
“For more than 50 years,” the report says, “U.S. research universities, the envy of the world, have welcomed and fostered the talents of both foreign-born and U.S. students in the service of national and economic security.”
With fewer American students choosing careers in science and engineering, the American research and development effort cannot be sustained without a significant and steady infusion of foreign participants, the committee said.
But the panel said safeguards are needed to ensure that important research does not fall into the wrong hands. It recommended creating a standing government commission “to address ongoing shared concerns of the security and academic research communities,” including export and visa policies and participation of foreigners in research.
The commission should be led by the president’s national security adviser and the director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy and include representatives from academic research institutions and national security agencies, the panel recommended.
Forming this commission, the panel said, should allow the government to strike a balance between science and security.
Jacques Gansler of the University of Maryland, a former Pentagon official who is co-chairman of the committee, said research institutions have taken steps since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, to address security concerns.
“However, both the security and scientific communities agree that losing our leading edge in science and technology is one of the greatest threats to national security,” Dr. Gansler said in a statement. “Unnecessary or ill-conceived restrictions could jeopardize the scientific and technical progress that our nation depends upon.
for link to article click the title of this post
How perverse is it to have the students right here in the U.S., educated in U.S. colleges and universities - while not being able to use their talents while helping the U.S. with its technology gap?
-----
Experts Urge Exchange of Scientific Talent
By REUTERS
Published: October 19, 2007
New York Times
WASHINGTON, Oct. 18 (Reuters) — The federal government should create a commission to promote the free flow of scientific knowledge and researchers from other countries while balancing the threat from enemies, an expert panel said Thursday.
The panel, appointed by the National Research Council, which provides advice to American policymakers, said colleges and research institutions must continue to bring in foreign science and engineering students. “The global scientific enterprise thrives on the movement of students and scholars across borders and among institutions,” it said in a report.
“For more than 50 years,” the report says, “U.S. research universities, the envy of the world, have welcomed and fostered the talents of both foreign-born and U.S. students in the service of national and economic security.”
With fewer American students choosing careers in science and engineering, the American research and development effort cannot be sustained without a significant and steady infusion of foreign participants, the committee said.
But the panel said safeguards are needed to ensure that important research does not fall into the wrong hands. It recommended creating a standing government commission “to address ongoing shared concerns of the security and academic research communities,” including export and visa policies and participation of foreigners in research.
The commission should be led by the president’s national security adviser and the director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy and include representatives from academic research institutions and national security agencies, the panel recommended.
Forming this commission, the panel said, should allow the government to strike a balance between science and security.
Jacques Gansler of the University of Maryland, a former Pentagon official who is co-chairman of the committee, said research institutions have taken steps since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, to address security concerns.
“However, both the security and scientific communities agree that losing our leading edge in science and technology is one of the greatest threats to national security,” Dr. Gansler said in a statement. “Unnecessary or ill-conceived restrictions could jeopardize the scientific and technical progress that our nation depends upon.
for link to article click the title of this post
Sunday, October 7, 2007
What Does a DREAM ACT Student Look Like?
The LA Times has a front page article on the need for agricultural workers. It also tells of a series of raids in southern California - these raids are announced as attempts to capture gang members and criminals who are also undocumented.
So when DREAM ACT students traveled on a train from LA to Santa Ana, dressed up in suits and telling people "this is what a Dream Act student looks like" -- do people actually believe them? We have been saturated with images of an evil, predatory "Illegal aliens" --- the words sound so harsh, is this the descriptoin of a real human being?
When will the U.S. media begin to correct this mis-representation? Most undocumented people are not criminals or gang members. Many are the parents of these very same students.
_____
Illegal immigrant students lobby for a chance at legal residency
A bill making them eligible for green cards is expected to come up for a vote by the full Senate before Nov. 16.
By Jennifer Delson, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
October 5, 2007
Illegal immigrant students boarded rush-hour Metrolink trains in Santa Ana last week to bring attention to pending legislation that could make them eligible for green cards and put them on the path toward U.S. citizenship.
These young adults, brought to the United States by their parents when they were children, tried to explain to commuters why the federal government should give them legal U.S. residency. Without green cards, the students said they could graduate from college but would probably have trouble pursuing professional careers.
Frank Nuñez, who has spent 23 of his 24 years in the United States, wore a business suit and boarded the Metrolink train headed to Irvine.
"We want to get the word out, and we want people to see us, to see that we aren't what people think illegal immigrants look like," Nuñez said. "A lot of people think of an illegal immigrant as Paco who just crossed the border yesterday and is in front of Home Depot looking for work."
Aboard the train, Nuñez approached passengers and said, "Hello, my name is Frank, and I'm an undocumented student," before lobbying for their support of the proposed federal law.
Nuñez and other students around California will spend the next several weeks trying to drum up support with more train rides, teach-ins and campus protests promoting the Dream Act, which stands for Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors. The act is expected to come up for a vote by the full Senate before Nov. 16. Opponents blocked a previous vote on the legislation, denouncing it as a reward for the children of lawbreakers.
"For the next two weeks, we will see a lot of activity from immigrant students on college campuses and in high schools and in the community," said Horacio Arroyo, who has coordinated statewide Dream Act initiatives for the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles. "They will range from educating undocumented students to what their rights are, to telling them to call their representatives."
In another Metrolink car, Long Beach State student Jessica De Nova made a confession to a fellow passenger.
"It's hard for someone to say it," she said to Greg Ebbensgaard, who was heading home from an Irvine manufacturing job. "But I'm an undocumented student. It's important for me to say it because I want you to get an image of what we look like."
Ebbensgaard looked at De Nova, who wore a black blazer and had her hair in a stylish bob, and said he wanted to learn more about the Dream Act.
"We need people like you," he said. "They always focus on illegal immigrants as criminals. That's what's hurting you guys. They should narrow the laws so they just block criminals from getting in the country."
Other students, such as Carlos, who asked that his last name not be published, were not warmly received. He told commuter Mike Bander, 58, of San Juan Capistrano: "I go to college, and it's important to me and other undocumented students who are fighting for their dreams that you support the Dream Act."
Bander, a high school teacher in Huntington Park, was not swayed.
"I'm not against these kids going to school, but our funds are limited, and there are only so many pieces of the pie," he said. "It's possible that when they go to college, they take a seat from someone who is a citizen."
The National Immigration Law Center in Washington estimates that at least 65,000 high school students in the U.S. graduate each year without legal immigration status.
Under the Dream Act, immigrants who have been in the country for at least five years, have a high school diploma and meet other requirements could receive conditional legal residency. Over the next six years, they would have to spend two years in college or the military to qualify for permanent legal residency, a step toward citizenship.
Rick Oltman, spokesman for Californians for Population Stabilization, opposes the legislation and believes it has little chance of passage.
"If we just give the students a break, who will be the next group we will have to give a break to? We're constantly moving the line," Oltman said. "It's unfortunate for these kids . . . but who should feel the discomfort, these kids or American citizens' kids who feel the discomfort when they take away resources and seats in college classrooms?"
Students across the state are also asking Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to sign the California Dream Act, which would relax some financial aid requirements for undocumented students. The act was approved by the state Legislature on Sept. 11 and remains on the governor's desk.
At the Korean Resource Center, a campaign is underway to get Los Angeles-area residents to sign postcards that will be sent to members of Congress, said immigrant rights coordinator Yong Ho Kim. The postcards read: "One in five Koreans are undocumented. Please pass the Dream Act so that young people can go to college and achieve their dreams."
In Orange County, a coalition has prepared a resolution for local city councils. A vote on the Dream Act resolution could be taken in the Santa Ana City Council later this month, said James Johnson, community liaison of the Orange County Dream Team, a coalition of students and allies lobbying for the legislation.
On Oct. 13, the group will perform a 20-minute play at the Breath of Fire Theater in Santa Ana. The play's title, "Nine Digits Away From My Dream," refers to the need to have a Social Security number to secure a good job.
"We're fighting for young people who didn't have any say in their situation," Johnson said. "They did what they were told and came here with their parents. They went to school. They have goals, and they are reaching out for them. We need to help."
jennifer.delson@latimes.com
for link to article click title of this post
So when DREAM ACT students traveled on a train from LA to Santa Ana, dressed up in suits and telling people "this is what a Dream Act student looks like" -- do people actually believe them? We have been saturated with images of an evil, predatory "Illegal aliens" --- the words sound so harsh, is this the descriptoin of a real human being?
When will the U.S. media begin to correct this mis-representation? Most undocumented people are not criminals or gang members. Many are the parents of these very same students.
_____
Illegal immigrant students lobby for a chance at legal residency
A bill making them eligible for green cards is expected to come up for a vote by the full Senate before Nov. 16.
By Jennifer Delson, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
October 5, 2007
Illegal immigrant students boarded rush-hour Metrolink trains in Santa Ana last week to bring attention to pending legislation that could make them eligible for green cards and put them on the path toward U.S. citizenship.
These young adults, brought to the United States by their parents when they were children, tried to explain to commuters why the federal government should give them legal U.S. residency. Without green cards, the students said they could graduate from college but would probably have trouble pursuing professional careers.
Frank Nuñez, who has spent 23 of his 24 years in the United States, wore a business suit and boarded the Metrolink train headed to Irvine.
"We want to get the word out, and we want people to see us, to see that we aren't what people think illegal immigrants look like," Nuñez said. "A lot of people think of an illegal immigrant as Paco who just crossed the border yesterday and is in front of Home Depot looking for work."
Aboard the train, Nuñez approached passengers and said, "Hello, my name is Frank, and I'm an undocumented student," before lobbying for their support of the proposed federal law.
Nuñez and other students around California will spend the next several weeks trying to drum up support with more train rides, teach-ins and campus protests promoting the Dream Act, which stands for Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors. The act is expected to come up for a vote by the full Senate before Nov. 16. Opponents blocked a previous vote on the legislation, denouncing it as a reward for the children of lawbreakers.
"For the next two weeks, we will see a lot of activity from immigrant students on college campuses and in high schools and in the community," said Horacio Arroyo, who has coordinated statewide Dream Act initiatives for the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles. "They will range from educating undocumented students to what their rights are, to telling them to call their representatives."
In another Metrolink car, Long Beach State student Jessica De Nova made a confession to a fellow passenger.
"It's hard for someone to say it," she said to Greg Ebbensgaard, who was heading home from an Irvine manufacturing job. "But I'm an undocumented student. It's important for me to say it because I want you to get an image of what we look like."
Ebbensgaard looked at De Nova, who wore a black blazer and had her hair in a stylish bob, and said he wanted to learn more about the Dream Act.
"We need people like you," he said. "They always focus on illegal immigrants as criminals. That's what's hurting you guys. They should narrow the laws so they just block criminals from getting in the country."
Other students, such as Carlos, who asked that his last name not be published, were not warmly received. He told commuter Mike Bander, 58, of San Juan Capistrano: "I go to college, and it's important to me and other undocumented students who are fighting for their dreams that you support the Dream Act."
Bander, a high school teacher in Huntington Park, was not swayed.
"I'm not against these kids going to school, but our funds are limited, and there are only so many pieces of the pie," he said. "It's possible that when they go to college, they take a seat from someone who is a citizen."
The National Immigration Law Center in Washington estimates that at least 65,000 high school students in the U.S. graduate each year without legal immigration status.
Under the Dream Act, immigrants who have been in the country for at least five years, have a high school diploma and meet other requirements could receive conditional legal residency. Over the next six years, they would have to spend two years in college or the military to qualify for permanent legal residency, a step toward citizenship.
Rick Oltman, spokesman for Californians for Population Stabilization, opposes the legislation and believes it has little chance of passage.
"If we just give the students a break, who will be the next group we will have to give a break to? We're constantly moving the line," Oltman said. "It's unfortunate for these kids . . . but who should feel the discomfort, these kids or American citizens' kids who feel the discomfort when they take away resources and seats in college classrooms?"
Students across the state are also asking Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to sign the California Dream Act, which would relax some financial aid requirements for undocumented students. The act was approved by the state Legislature on Sept. 11 and remains on the governor's desk.
At the Korean Resource Center, a campaign is underway to get Los Angeles-area residents to sign postcards that will be sent to members of Congress, said immigrant rights coordinator Yong Ho Kim. The postcards read: "One in five Koreans are undocumented. Please pass the Dream Act so that young people can go to college and achieve their dreams."
In Orange County, a coalition has prepared a resolution for local city councils. A vote on the Dream Act resolution could be taken in the Santa Ana City Council later this month, said James Johnson, community liaison of the Orange County Dream Team, a coalition of students and allies lobbying for the legislation.
On Oct. 13, the group will perform a 20-minute play at the Breath of Fire Theater in Santa Ana. The play's title, "Nine Digits Away From My Dream," refers to the need to have a Social Security number to secure a good job.
"We're fighting for young people who didn't have any say in their situation," Johnson said. "They did what they were told and came here with their parents. They went to school. They have goals, and they are reaching out for them. We need to help."
jennifer.delson@latimes.com
for link to article click title of this post
Wednesday, October 3, 2007
The DREAM ACT and Sofie's Choice
"conditional residency status" does not automatically mean in-state tuition. That option was negotiated out of the senate bill.
----
In the film "Sofie's Choice" a young mother is forced to decide which of her two children will live and which wil die. She and the children have arrived at Auschwitz. A sadistic German officer forces her to make a decision. Ultimately it is her daughter that dies and her son that lives. The guilt destroys her life. She survives the death camp and immigrates to the United States, but the guilt overtakes her.
The current state of the DREAM ACT has a strong semblance to Sophie's Choice. U.S. Senators have decided who will live and who will die. I mean this literally. The DREAM ACT students who have already completed their 2 years of college (and other requirements like no criminal record etc) will not only live, but will flourish with their new residency status, their education and their tremendous drive. The undocumented youth who have not completed the education requirement may have no other choice than to join the military. The only chance they have is if they live in a state that already has in-state tuition for undocumented students - then they can continue their schooling. If they reside in one of the other 40 states they will have to come up with thousands of dollars to pay international student rates. Remember that undocumented students rarely qualify for financial aide.
To regularize they join the Army, or the Marines, or another branch of the military. Since the U.S. Congress has not made any kind of committment regarding our withdraw of American troops, it is likely these young recruits will be sent to Iraq. We all know the consequences of that assignment. Military deaths in Iraq and Afganistan do not match the Vietnam War, but if you include injuries causing disabilities, the numbers are the same.
it is important for me to clarify that I'm not totally against the military. What I do not agree with is thousands of soldiers being sent to a conflict that should have been ended long ago. Otherwise, the military is great for most young people. By enlisting they mature, leave their home region, meet people from all over, and then take with them benefits that will help them continue their education.
So its one for the other. I'm sure the DREAM ACT is seriously being considered now because of the military option. Otherwise it would have passed a long time ago. When Durbin took out the in-state tuition clause he and his colleagues decided to greatly reduce the accessibility of the education option in order to get the bill passed.
The consequences are this:
in one family there are two DREAM ACT students. One that just completed college and one finishing high school. The college graduate will automatically qualify. The high school student faces dismal prospects if the state in which he lives does not have in-state tuition.
He may have "conditional residency status" - but this will not automatically allow him in-state tuition. He will not qualify for in-state tuition in the other 40 states until he obtains his "permanent residency."
What does he do now if he can't afford international student tuition rates?
----
In the film "Sofie's Choice" a young mother is forced to decide which of her two children will live and which wil die. She and the children have arrived at Auschwitz. A sadistic German officer forces her to make a decision. Ultimately it is her daughter that dies and her son that lives. The guilt destroys her life. She survives the death camp and immigrates to the United States, but the guilt overtakes her.
The current state of the DREAM ACT has a strong semblance to Sophie's Choice. U.S. Senators have decided who will live and who will die. I mean this literally. The DREAM ACT students who have already completed their 2 years of college (and other requirements like no criminal record etc) will not only live, but will flourish with their new residency status, their education and their tremendous drive. The undocumented youth who have not completed the education requirement may have no other choice than to join the military. The only chance they have is if they live in a state that already has in-state tuition for undocumented students - then they can continue their schooling. If they reside in one of the other 40 states they will have to come up with thousands of dollars to pay international student rates. Remember that undocumented students rarely qualify for financial aide.
To regularize they join the Army, or the Marines, or another branch of the military. Since the U.S. Congress has not made any kind of committment regarding our withdraw of American troops, it is likely these young recruits will be sent to Iraq. We all know the consequences of that assignment. Military deaths in Iraq and Afganistan do not match the Vietnam War, but if you include injuries causing disabilities, the numbers are the same.
it is important for me to clarify that I'm not totally against the military. What I do not agree with is thousands of soldiers being sent to a conflict that should have been ended long ago. Otherwise, the military is great for most young people. By enlisting they mature, leave their home region, meet people from all over, and then take with them benefits that will help them continue their education.
So its one for the other. I'm sure the DREAM ACT is seriously being considered now because of the military option. Otherwise it would have passed a long time ago. When Durbin took out the in-state tuition clause he and his colleagues decided to greatly reduce the accessibility of the education option in order to get the bill passed.
The consequences are this:
in one family there are two DREAM ACT students. One that just completed college and one finishing high school. The college graduate will automatically qualify. The high school student faces dismal prospects if the state in which he lives does not have in-state tuition.
He may have "conditional residency status" - but this will not automatically allow him in-state tuition. He will not qualify for in-state tuition in the other 40 states until he obtains his "permanent residency."
What does he do now if he can't afford international student tuition rates?
Monday, September 24, 2007
What Makes a Person "One of Our Own?"
See letter to the editor at the end of this post:
What makes a boy "one of our own?" Is it because the young man was born here?
Would he still be one of our own if he was born in the U.S. and at age two he moved to Italy, and stayed throughout adulthood? What if in Italy he learned Italian, went to their schools, and even studied the history of the Roman Empire or played with an Italian soccer team?
Would that boy be American or Italian? What if he couldn't even speak English anymore? What if he could speak Italian only?
What if he was the president of the student body at his Italian high school? Would the Italians consider him one of their own?
Its kind of like being adopted... people adopt children that were not born to them, but they raised them, and the children know no one else as parents. Are they the children of their adoptive parents?
Because of NAFTA and other ramifications of capitalism and globalization, the DREAM ACT student found himself/herself in the United States. They might have been born in Guatemala, but soon after birth they were already in the U.S. - they know no other country.
The final question is, does a child become "one of our own" by growing up in a community and taking in the culture and traditions of that community? Or is he "not one of our own" just because he happened to be born somewhere else, and his parents didn't have the money and/or social status to regularize their residence in the U.S.?
-----
Letter to the Editor
It's time to take care of our own
Arizona Republic
Sept. 24, 2007 12:00 AM
Regarding the scholarship program for illegal immigrant students at Arizona State University:
Now, remind me, why my son has to take out thousands of dollars in a loan to finance his education and they are doling out scholarships to illegal aliens?
Tell me why ASU President Michael Crow is so bent on taking care of everyone else except our own.
We have plenty of citizens here in Arizona who could use these scholarships to further their education. I, for one, think it is well past time for the arrogant elite to step aside and allow someone to take charge who actually cares for our citizenry. - Brent Layton,Claypool
What makes a boy "one of our own?" Is it because the young man was born here?
Would he still be one of our own if he was born in the U.S. and at age two he moved to Italy, and stayed throughout adulthood? What if in Italy he learned Italian, went to their schools, and even studied the history of the Roman Empire or played with an Italian soccer team?
Would that boy be American or Italian? What if he couldn't even speak English anymore? What if he could speak Italian only?
What if he was the president of the student body at his Italian high school? Would the Italians consider him one of their own?
Its kind of like being adopted... people adopt children that were not born to them, but they raised them, and the children know no one else as parents. Are they the children of their adoptive parents?
Because of NAFTA and other ramifications of capitalism and globalization, the DREAM ACT student found himself/herself in the United States. They might have been born in Guatemala, but soon after birth they were already in the U.S. - they know no other country.
The final question is, does a child become "one of our own" by growing up in a community and taking in the culture and traditions of that community? Or is he "not one of our own" just because he happened to be born somewhere else, and his parents didn't have the money and/or social status to regularize their residence in the U.S.?
-----
Letter to the Editor
It's time to take care of our own
Arizona Republic
Sept. 24, 2007 12:00 AM
Regarding the scholarship program for illegal immigrant students at Arizona State University:
Now, remind me, why my son has to take out thousands of dollars in a loan to finance his education and they are doling out scholarships to illegal aliens?
Tell me why ASU President Michael Crow is so bent on taking care of everyone else except our own.
We have plenty of citizens here in Arizona who could use these scholarships to further their education. I, for one, think it is well past time for the arrogant elite to step aside and allow someone to take charge who actually cares for our citizenry. - Brent Layton,Claypool
Sunday, September 23, 2007
Responses to LA Times Letters to the Editor
A few letters to the Editor from the LA Times - plus a response from DREAM ACT TEXAS
-----
Letter to the Editor
LA Times September 23
Re "A uniquely American DREAM," Opinion, Sept. 19
The DREAM Act is anything but "a small act of immigration reform." For every illegal immigrant student admitted into a state university system, another U.S. citizen or legal student will be rejected. Illegal immigrant students seeking in-state tuition at public universities aren't responsible for violating our laws, having been brought into this country illegally by their parents. But it's also true that U.S. citizens and legal residents who'll be rejected when illegal aliens are added to the queue are being punished for the actions of illegal immigrant parents.
RESPONSE-----
Only top ranked universities will be affected if an undocumented students takes a space. Most DREAM ACT students attend community colleges or lower ranked public univerisites - where very few citizens if none get shut out.
The DREAM ACT students are required to follow U.S. laws, they become immediately ineligible if they break ANY law.
-----
Letter:
Never mind that the legislation is chock-full of loopholes and open to fraud.
Its ultimate effect is that immigrants can use their newly acquired green card or citizen status to seek passage for the parents who brought them in and then put in motion the chain migration cycle.
RESPONSE
The legislation is open to fraud yes, but against the best interest of the students. The military has them cornered. They have to have an Honorable Discharge from the military (25% discharges are not honorable). If they are severely injured and cannot complete their two years, they are also disqualified. If they live in a state that does not have in-state tuition they have little chance to go to college - In fact only an extremely small percentage make it through high school - and when they do, they are likely to have attended a problemmatic inner city school - with them less prepared for college.
-----
Letter
The DREAM Act would permit illegal immigrant students to eventually seek green cards for their illegal immigrant parents, which could add millions of illegal aliens to the population. It is proposed by the same people who want to import poverty to the United States, which would eventually require increased taxes to support a burgeoning population of foreign nationals.
RESPONSE
DREAM ACT students can request green cards for their parents, but remember our legal immigration system is cumbersome and ridiculously inefficient. You forget that it often takes up to 12 years for a person to recieve a green card - if its done through a sponsor.
See previous post "Journalists Beware: How Do You Use Data to Tell a Story, September 18. Immigrants do not import poverty they keep our economy vibrant. In addition DREAM ACT students will be productive tax payers and will help pay for benefits of the entitled baby boomer generation. Without all those billions that get lost in the social security system (paid by immigrants who can never claim their benefits) the social security system would collapse.
for link to LA Times letters, click title to this post
-----
Letter to the Editor
LA Times September 23
Re "A uniquely American DREAM," Opinion, Sept. 19
The DREAM Act is anything but "a small act of immigration reform." For every illegal immigrant student admitted into a state university system, another U.S. citizen or legal student will be rejected. Illegal immigrant students seeking in-state tuition at public universities aren't responsible for violating our laws, having been brought into this country illegally by their parents. But it's also true that U.S. citizens and legal residents who'll be rejected when illegal aliens are added to the queue are being punished for the actions of illegal immigrant parents.
RESPONSE-----
Only top ranked universities will be affected if an undocumented students takes a space. Most DREAM ACT students attend community colleges or lower ranked public univerisites - where very few citizens if none get shut out.
The DREAM ACT students are required to follow U.S. laws, they become immediately ineligible if they break ANY law.
-----
Letter:
Never mind that the legislation is chock-full of loopholes and open to fraud.
Its ultimate effect is that immigrants can use their newly acquired green card or citizen status to seek passage for the parents who brought them in and then put in motion the chain migration cycle.
RESPONSE
The legislation is open to fraud yes, but against the best interest of the students. The military has them cornered. They have to have an Honorable Discharge from the military (25% discharges are not honorable). If they are severely injured and cannot complete their two years, they are also disqualified. If they live in a state that does not have in-state tuition they have little chance to go to college - In fact only an extremely small percentage make it through high school - and when they do, they are likely to have attended a problemmatic inner city school - with them less prepared for college.
-----
Letter
The DREAM Act would permit illegal immigrant students to eventually seek green cards for their illegal immigrant parents, which could add millions of illegal aliens to the population. It is proposed by the same people who want to import poverty to the United States, which would eventually require increased taxes to support a burgeoning population of foreign nationals.
RESPONSE
DREAM ACT students can request green cards for their parents, but remember our legal immigration system is cumbersome and ridiculously inefficient. You forget that it often takes up to 12 years for a person to recieve a green card - if its done through a sponsor.
See previous post "Journalists Beware: How Do You Use Data to Tell a Story, September 18. Immigrants do not import poverty they keep our economy vibrant. In addition DREAM ACT students will be productive tax payers and will help pay for benefits of the entitled baby boomer generation. Without all those billions that get lost in the social security system (paid by immigrants who can never claim their benefits) the social security system would collapse.
for link to LA Times letters, click title to this post
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)