Reintroducing the DREAM Act; Where Does KBH Stand?

My wife teaches at a public high school that has some students who are not in the U.S. legally. In most cases, family members brought these undocumented students to the U.S. as children. By the time they finish high school, these kids have spent most of their lives here.

My wife and her colleagues have taught undocumented students who make good grades, participate in extracurricular activities, and stay out of trouble. (And many of these kids face daily pressures that teenagers in other parts of town have never experienced.) These students clearly possess the ability to succeed in college and in a career. Their undocumented status, however, presents a major obstacle to future advancement.

Most will be unable to attend college. Financial aid is generally unavailable to undocumented students. Without it, tuition and fees are prohibitive for most. Even if an undocumented student makes it through college, a career in the student’s field of study is unlikely given the student’s status.

The National Immigration Law Center estimates that each year, about 65,000 such students graduate from U.S. high schools. Federal legislation known as The Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors Act (DREAM Act) would provide these students a pathway to legalizing their status.

The DREAM Act was originally introduced in 2001. It has been introduced in subsequent sessions as well, but Congress has yet to pass it. In 2007, the U.S. Senate considered the matter, but a filibuster thwarted the bill’s supporters.

The 2007 version of the act would have allowed any undocumented student who met certain qualifications to adjust his or her status to that of a conditional permanent resident. Specifically, the act would have applied to an undocumented student who: (1) had entered the U.S. before the age of 16; (2) had been physically present in the U.S. for a continuous five-year period; (3) had earned a high school diploma or its equivalent; (4) was a person of good moral character; and (5) did not have a criminal record and was not a danger to national security. A student’s conditional status would be lifted if the student did one of the following within six years: (1) earned a two-year degree or completed at least two years toward a bachelor’s degree; or (2) served at least two years in the U.S. Armed Forces. Sounds reasonable doesn't it?

Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) is expected to reintroduce the DREAM Act this week. DREAM Act supporters, which include me, are hopeful that Congress will finally enact this needed measure.

Sen. Cornyn supported the filibuster of the 2007 version of the DREAM Act. (He voted against the cloture motion.) Cornyn presumably will continue to oppose the DREAM Act.

Sen. Hutchison actually voted in favor of cloture (which would have ended the filibuster) in 2007. She intended, however, to offer an amendment that was aimed at making the bill more palatable to her fellow Republicans. (She never got the chance, as the cloture motion failed.)

DREAM Act supporters consider Hutchison to be on the fence. Her office will no doubt receive many phone calls, letters and e-mail messages urging her to support the act. But Hutchison, who hopes to be Texas’ next governor, is preparing for a primary showdown with Gov. Perry. How many likely Republican primary voters support the DREAM Act? That is no doubt a question Hutchison will be asking herself as she considers the measure.

For those of you interested in the DREAM Act, the Immigration Policy Center addresses some FAQ’s here(pdf). I hope to say more about this issue in future posts.