Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

cloudship

DREAM Act - Education for minor immigrants

6 posts in this topic

Being a community college, this is a big deal for us at work. It has sparked a lot of discussion, and in the spirit of all our other immigrant threads, I though I would post this. I am also going to post in a second message the opinion of the AILA - American immigration Lawyer's Association.

Current Legislation: The Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act

(S.774) sponsored by Senators Richard Durbin (D-IL), Chuck Hagel (R-NE), and Richard Lugar (RIN),

and the American Dream Act (H.R. 1275), sponsored by Representatives Lincoln Diaz-Balart

(R-FL), Howard Berman (D-CA), and Rep. Lucille Roybal-Allard (D-CA), were introduced in March

2007. Both pieces of legislation address the situation faced by young people who were brought to

the U.S. years ago as undocumented immigrant children but who have grown up here, stayed in

school, and kept out of trouble.

The DREAM Act would allow certain immigrant students who meet the legislation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Let's pour that money into our current citizenry....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a good question. What is costs versus funding? Ultimately state schools often run at a deficit. But that is not necessarily so in every case. The question is are we actually funding a person's education here, or are we simply funding the operation of a school? the way most public colleges work nowadays is that tuition is set, usually at a significantly lower cost than it really costs to fund the school. That is simply viewed as a tax, in a way. Funding for the school is done in one allotment, usually related to but not totally proportional to the number of attending students. And, most students pay far, far more in fees than they do tuition.

In this case it is not actually waiving tuition. What it is doing is saying that an undocumented minor, who obviously only came here because they were taken by their parents, and who a) stays out of trouble (that's a big one there), and b) has put enough effort to graduate and get accepted into college, will have the chance to pay the normal rate and not the increased out of state rate. Plus, if they actually do make the effort to to become productive (actually get a degree), or serve in the military, then they have a chance at becoming a permanent resident.

Personally, I find the out of state tuition more punitive than anything else. But if one state does it, they all have to. Tuition makes so little difference to the costs of college at a state college that it means little. That's minor to the act, anyways. The real value in this act is that it says if you actually try to become a valuable, then we will give a legal status. Another words, they must attend college or serve in the military. they can't just sit around and do nothing, or the status goes away. And that, I think, is the ultimate goal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At least they have to pay in-state tuition. I mean, if they for example live in Hartford and go to UConn, they still live in Hartford. Let them pay the in-state fee like anyone else from Hartford would. It's not their fault their parents dragged them illegally into the United States. As long as they want to get an education and remain in America, let them get a chance just like everyone else would.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In Georgia, the out of state tution jumps anywhere from 10K to 15K over instate tuition. If a young person residing in my state wants to attend college after high school I see no reason to make him pay the out of state. Sounds like a good bill to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

my thought is if they are paying taxes to the state where they're going to college, they can pay the in-state tuition (which is generally the ruling for how they determine residency). if they are working under the table and not paying incomes taxes (or their parents aren't paying income taxes), they should pay the out of state tuition. the reason the in-state tuition is lower is because of the assumption that you're supporting the school through your taxes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.