Thread: FAIR Update on DREAM Act - Monday 9/24/07

FAIR Update on DREAM Act - Monday 9/24/07

DREAM Act Still Looms Over Senate

For almost a week now, true immigration reformers have been bracing for the possibility that Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) and other amnesty advocates will bring the DREAM Act to the floor as an amendment to the Department of Defense Authorization Bill (H.R.1585). The efforts by amnesty advocates such as Senator Durbin to tack the DREAM Act onto what many consider a "must-pass" bill has been widely criticized as an attempt to pass amnesty legislation piece by piece. The DREAM Act was part of the massive Bush-Kennedy Amnesty Bill (S.1639), which was overwhelmingly rejected in June of this year.

The week began with Senator Durbin giving a speech on the Senate floor, recognizing that some might question why he would bring up such a controversial amendment during a debate over our nation's armed forces. His response was that the DREAM Act would address a serious recruitment crisis facing our military. "Under the DREAM Act," he said, "tens of thousands of well-qualified potential recruits would become eligible for military service for the first time. They are eager to serve in the armed services, and under the DREAM Act, they would have a very strong incentive to enlist because it would give them a path to permanent legal status."

Senator Durbin's vision of granting legal status to illegal aliens in order to meet our military recruitment goals was not well-received. This may have been because those who are familiar with the DREAM Act's history know that the legislation deals with more than granting amnesty to illegal aliens who serve in the military. Previous versions of the legislation have granted amnesty to an uncapped number of illegal aliens in the military or school—regardless of age, it allowed states to offer in-state tuition to illegal aliens and it expressly provided that illegal aliens who receive status under the Act are eligible for federal financial aid for college tuition.

Under pressure from skeptics in the Senate and growing outcries from middle-class America, Senator Durbin filed a revised version of his DREAM Act (S.A.2919) amendment on Wednesday. The revised version purports to create an age limit of 30; however the age limit does not affect the ability of illegal aliens to receive retroactive benefits if they already meet the criteria of the amnesty program. The amendment also deletes the section relating to in-state tuition, but maintains the provision allowing illegal aliens granted legal status under the program to receive federal financial aid for college tuition.

Whether these changes are sufficient to persuade more Senators to support this amnesty legislation is still in question. Outraged constituents have been calling Senate offices by the thousands. In fact, FAIR has learned that one Senate office received over 10,000 calls on the DREAM Act in only three days—85% of which were in opposition. Some worry that the relative silence on the part of amnesty advocates suggest that they intend to slip the DREAM Act into the DOD Authorization Bill under the cover of darkness. Stay tuned to FAIR for more updates on the DREAM Act…

Important points that we should hammer to show that we are not fooled by Durbin's minor changes to the "Dream Act" amnesty:

Under pressure from skeptics in the Senate and growing outcries from middle-class America, Senator Durbin filed a revised version of his DREAM Act (S.A.2919) amendment on Wednesday. The revised version purports to create an age limit of 30; however the age limit does not affect the ability of illegal aliens to receive retroactive benefits if they already meet the criteria of the amnesty program. The amendment also deletes the section relating to in-state tuition, but maintains the provision allowing illegal aliens granted legal status under the program to receive federal financial aid for college tuition.

I thought the House and Senate had to vote on these amendments ?

Originally Posted by NOamNASTY

I thought the House and Senate had to vote on these amendments ?

who knows, now that the constitution is merely a suggestion, I guess they can do what ever they want

agribusiness
http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/r ... ortorder=U

restaurants
http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/r ... ortorder=U

hotels
http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/r ... ortorder=U

construction - home builders
http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/r ... ortorder=U

construction - general contractors
http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/r ... ortorder=U

transportation - trucking
http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/r ... ortorder=U