California "Dream Act" approved for illegal immigrants

[Elizabeth502]

news.yahoo.com/california-dream-act-approved-illegal-immigrants-013617230.html

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - California Governor Jerry Brown signed into law on Monday a bill allowing illegal immigrants to receive privately funded scholarships to attend the state’s public colleges and universities. The California law is named after national legislation in Congress to give young, undocumented immigrants who have lived in the United States for at least five years a pathway to citizenship through college or military service.

The federal bill failed to win passage in December 2010, and its chances have dimmed since a newly elected Republican majority took control of the House of Representatives.

Critics say the California Dream Act gives illegal immigrants a false promise because their status will not change after graduating from college and they will remain unable to find legal employment. Former Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, a Republican, vetoed an earlier version of the bill last year.

But Julian Rivera, 20, a student at the University of California at Berkeley who entered the United States illegally with his parents at age 12 from Mexico, said the measure could make it easier those like him to afford to stay in school.

“It doesn’t matter where you come from, it doesn’t matter what your background is, it just matters that you have passion for something and you want to do it,” he said. “This is a country that has given us that freedom.”

OPPOSING “THE DREAM”

Patrick McDonough, a Republican member of the Maryland House of Delegates who helped lead the petition drive for the repeal initiative there, said U.S. citizens who are struggling to pay for college should not have to compete with illegal immigrants for scarce financial resources. “People would say, ‘Why should we, when we’re having tough economic times ourselves, pay for someone who is here illegally?’” he said.

Someone explain to me how a State can now grant U.S. citizenship. (That is the thrust of the discussion about a federal ‘Dream Act,’ anyway: citizenship, not private scholarships.)

This “Dream” appears instead to allow private scholarship access. I actually have no poblem with private foundations making funds available to students of any background. I have a problem with equality of admission eligibility for crowded public institutions, paid for by those here legally, to those here not legally. I do not have a problem with admission to university for the undocumented on a space available basis, after all legal residents who are qualified are reviewed. I would actually prefer to see that as a provision in any Dream Act: that would include out-of-state admissibility, allowing relocation of a family to less burdened States so as to ease cluster pressures. (Again, after legal residents.) Every year there are both public and private colleges which have enrollment space. This is never true of the University of California except for the Riverside campus, and in general it is no longer true of most of the CSU system.

 

[Dale_M]

Someone explain to me how a State can now grant U.S. citizenship. (That is the thrust of the discussion about a federal ‘Dream Act,’ anyway: citizenship, not private scholarships.)

Of course, a state can not do that. However, although the federal Dream Act and the California Dream Act share similar names, the California law is much more limited in scope, as you noted.

Here is the text of the new law:
leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/bill/asm/ab_0101-0150/ab_130_bill_20110718_enrolled.pdf

This “Dream” appears instead to allow private scholarship access. I actually have no poblem with private foundations making funds available to students of any background. I have a problem with equality of admission eligibility for crowded public institutions, paid for by those here legally, to those here not legally.

Of course, that situation was created by an earlier California law, not this one.

I would actually prefer to see that as a provision in any Dream Act: that would include out-of-state admissibility, allowing relocation of a family to less burdened States so as to ease cluster pressures. (Again, after legal residents.)

I am not sure it would be lawful for a state government to relocate illegal residents to other states with the intent of making them residents of the new state. And if were a federal program, it would call into question the legal status of such families.

 

[Tigg]

I thought California was having a budget crisis! Won’t this increase it and place a further burden on taxpayers?

I really can’t figure it all out. I have relatives in southern CA and heard that recently tuition was raised again in certain schools (since funding has been cut by the gov’t) which will cause the cousins to try to find a second job to help pay for their education. I’ve not researched this - only read little bits here and there, but where is the justice in this action and how is the common good being served?

 

[Elizabeth502]

I am not sure it would be lawful for a state government to relocate illegal residents to other states with the intent of making them residents of the new state. And if were a federal program, it would call into question the legal status of such families.

That’s not the idea. First of all, it would not be required relocation. It would be invited relocation. There’s no law against that. A federal Dream Act obviously crosses states. In doing so, such an Act should not overburden states who lack space for students in their public systems (such as CA has had for years) Opening up space-available campuses in all 50 states to the undocumented, without offering public funds but allowing private scholarship funds, will still be controversial among those who want no opportunity for illegal immigrants, but it would remove some of the most morally egregious injustices to legal residents which occur right now.

 

[Elizabeth502]

I thought California was having a budget crisis! Won’t this increase it and place a further burden on taxpayers?

Yes. And it has already affected the legal residents who are poor and dependent on financial aid for continuing their education at their UC campus. They are having to meet new standards for financial aid (Cal Grant aid), because of this budget crisis. (That’s in addition to, as you say, the middle class having to take on supplmental employment – or debt – in order to meet the rising tuition costs.)

 

[Garyjohn2]

Oh noes!

 

[Nimzovik]

If one gives away the farm–guess what? You no longer have a farm! However in this case the farm is being stolen via Gov’t officials bogus machinations.

 

[Dale_M]

I thought California was having a budget crisis! Won’t this increase it and place a further burden on taxpayers?

I think that is hard to say. I went through college a couple decades ago, but at the time private scholarships were very hard to qualify for since they had so many conditions e.g. must be a child of a member of the fraternal organization offering the scholarship, or an ancestor of someone who died in the S.S. Eastland disaster.

And the easier it was to qualify for a private scholarship, the less money that scholarship offered.

Will eligibility for private scholarships increase enrollment in California colleges and universities? Well, maybe. But I am not sure it will have any kind of significant impact.

 

[Elizabeth502]

Will eligibility for private scholarships increase enrollment in California colleges and universities? Well, maybe. But I am not sure it will have any kind of significant impact.

If one cannot pay (and given that there are limits to loans now), then one might not be able to attend. (Being a full-time student essentially requires a full time entry-level salary, lacking donated resources.) An inability to attend frees up, by definition, spots for legal residents.

There are in fact many specific scholarships for a variety of ethnic groups. It would also be possible to open scholarships not yet operative. As an overall policy, it supports a public good to have an educated work force. However, it violates justice to displace legal residents for illegal ones. (It trades one justice for an injustice; in Catholic moral theology, the end does not justify the means, nor can one justice be traded against another justice.) Hence, my suggestion that undocumented students get in line behind documented students. There are thousands of quality institutions in this vast country; there should be no impediment to attend an alternative institution versus the ones which are already overcrowded to those legally residing here. Many institutions (such as UC and other publics) regularly reject highly qualified legal residents, due merely to the competitve factors involved. (A way to jump qualifications for the UC system is to claim personal obstacles, and being undocumented and First Generation to attend college – regardless of how one arrived here – is considered a legitimate personal obstacle.)

The Regents have been obstinate about this. Therefore, the way to override that would be through a Federal Dream Act which required restoration of legal residency as a policy priority in admissions, with alternate educational avenues open in other institutions and locations. That would not be limited, naturally, to public institutions. Privates could choose to admit, and their higher tuition might be met by a longer period in college.

 

[Ridgerunner]

I think if I was a California H.S. graduate with some hope of a scholarship, I would really be steamed by this. I would be particularly steamed by the fact that private foundations might want to win the “La Raza Prize” or something by instituting "affirmative action"in awarding the scholarships. Private foundations pay no taxes, so they are in effect “subsidized” by the state and federal governments at taxpayer expense. And, of course, the government now controls student loans, so there we are.

I suppose if California taxpayers want this, it’s up to them.

 

[Elizabeth502]

I suppose if California taxpayers want this, it’s up to them.

That’s complicated, Ridgerunner. CA voters obviously vote in their legislators. However, there has been a great deal of political reapportionment to achieve certain ends. Further, this is a legislature which often, like some other CA governmental bodies, and some NY gov’t bodies for that matter, operates autocratically, in opposition to clear voter preferences. (You’ll note that this very recent law was not a voter initiative by any means.)

 

[Ridgerunner]

That’s complicated, Ridgerunner. CA voters obviously vote in their legislators. However, there has been a great deal of political reapportionment to achieve certain ends. Further, this is a legislature which often, like some other CA governmental bodies, and some NY gov’t bodies for that matter, operates autocratically, in opposition to clear voter preferences. (You’ll note that this very recent law was not a voter initiative by any means.)

However it happens, this would really be infuriating to me if my kid was potential scholarship material and he didn’t get one while illegals did. Private foundation or no private foundation, they are almost universally tax-exempt organizations and, of course, many of the desirable schools in California are supported by tax dollars. And, of course, many private universities receive grants of all sorts from the state and the federal government.

It almost seems sometimes as if the “elites” in this country really don’t much like the rest of us.

I guess I should take some comfort in living in a 'flyover state", where people would truly be up in arms about a thing like this and would prevent it. The same would happen with legislatively enacted “homosexual marriage”. But, of course, the administration is bound and determined to impose homosexual “marriage” on all states and will do everything in its power to get it done.

 

[Elizabeth502]

I definitely agree with you, Ridgerunner, about the annoying and infuriating agenda of the self-appointed “Elite” class. What happens in CA frequently falls into this category; what happened recently in NY definitely falls into this category.

What’s interesting about the college funding thing is that the middle class is ambivalent: they know how they’re “supposed” to think – what is PC and socially acceptable to think, yet it’s finally beginning to hit them in the pocketbook. They have so identified themselves with what they are told are liberal causes, that they now feel guilty about breaking out of that box and advocating for themselves for a change. (And having grown accustomed to believe that only advocacy for others is permitted.)

 

[Ridgerunner]

I definitely agree with you, Ridgerunner, about the annoying and infuriating agenda of the self-appointed “Elite” class. What happens in CA frequently falls into this category; what happened recently in NY definitely falls into this category.

What’s interesting about the college funding thing is that the middle class is ambivalent: they know how they’re “supposed” to think – what is PC and socially acceptable to think, yet it’s finally beginning to hit them in the pocketbook. They have so identified themselves with what they are told are liberal causes, that they now feel guilty about breaking out of that box and advocating for themselves for a change. (And having grown accustomed to believe that only advocacy for others is permitted.)

You know, I’m really not all that interested in advocating for myself. At my age, my wants are pretty simple. But I do have adult children (all graduated now) and it was really rough to aid in financing their college and graduate school educations.

The message things like this enactment gives to ordinary Americans is that, to the elites, foreigners are more important than our own children. We should deny our own children so the children of people who have no right to be here at all are favored. And it isn’t as if those foreigners’ children can’t speak the language of their native lands, and it isn’t as if their colleges aren’t cheaper than ours are.

 

[Elizabeth502]

You know, I’m really not all that interested in advocating for myself. At my age, my wants are pretty simple. But I do have adult children (all graduated now) and it was really rough to aid in financing their college and graduate school educations.

I think you’re redefining what I meant by “advocacy.”

 

[faithfully]

I’m actually trying to figure out what the qualifications for this would be…

1. Must be an illegal alien…

Or is this a don’t ask don’t tell scenario…

 

[Elizabeth502]

No. Not must be. Can be. Thus, no private scholarship fund could require evidence of legal residency as part of the application process. That’s probably all that’s entailed.

 

[_Abyssinia]

Can somebody explan the Dream Ac to me? Are parents of the illegal immigrant child/teenager allowed to get citizenship with this act?

 

[Dale_M]

Can somebody explan the Dream Ac to me? Are parents of the illegal immigrant child/teenager allowed to get citizenship with this act?

No, the act that was just passed is extremely limited. It says that an illegal alien who has attended high school in California for at least three years and has graduated from a California high school is now eligible for private scholarships. The act doesn’t do anything else.