Thread: Sponsor tries to sweeten bill on illegal immigrant children

Sept. 21, 2007, 6:28AM
Sponsor tries to sweeten bill on illegal immigrant children
Key changes on tuition and age may overcome amnesty dispute

By MICHELLE MITTELSTADT
Copyright 2007 Houston Chronicle Washington Bureau
Complete coverage of immigration issues WASHINGTON — Hoping to win over skeptical Republicans, the Democratic author of legislation that could grant eventual U.S. citizenship to illegal immigrants brought in as children is narrowing his measure.

But it remains to be seen whether Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin's changes will be enough to satisfy Sen. John Cornyn of Texas and other Republicans under pressure from border-control groups to reject the DREAM Act.

Durbin, D-Ill., and allies in the immigrant-rights community argue that the legislation is meant to help children who did not knowingly violate U.S. immigration law, letting them reach their full educational and professional potential in the society they now call home.

"The fundamental premise of the DREAM Act is that we shouldn't punish children for the mistakes their parents made. That isn't the American way," Durbin said.

The legislation would allow illegal immigrants who have lived here at least five years and were younger at 16 at the time of entry to receive conditional legal status if they have graduated from high school and don't have any scrapes with the law.

After six years of conditional legal status, they could become permanent legal residents if they serve in the U.S. military for at least two years or complete at least two years of college. As with most green card holders, they could apply for citizenship after five years.

The Migration Policy Institute, a nonpartisan immigration research organization, has estimated that the DREAM Act could provide immediate conditional legal status to 360,000 high school graduates under the age of 24 and help 715,000 currently in school.

Though the measure (officially the Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors Act) has bipartisan support and has been endorsed on different occasions in the House and Senate, it has drawn new opposition from illegal immigration foes who argue it is tantamount to amnesty.

Facing the reality that the legislation, as written, would not garner the 60 votes necessary to surmount an expected Senate filibuster, Durbin said Thursday he is making two changes to draw GOP support. He is jettisoning a provision that would require states to offer in-state college tuition rates to illegal immigrants and limiting the DREAM Act to those under the age of 30.

Durbin said he intends to bring up his amendment next week on a defense authorization bill if he can line up 60 votes. "As you can tell, it's not easy," he said. "We have added those two provisions in hopes of attracting some Republican support. I don't like either one of them, but politics is the art of compromise."

Cornyn, who voted for the DREAM Act in 2003, said he would have to look at Durbin's changed bill to see if he could support it. But he said Thursday he objects to bringing up immigration on the defense bill.

"There is a time and a place for everything, and frankly this is not the time to do it on the defense authorization bill," he said.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/nation/5153034.html

How much time and expense is WASTED shaking the cup, begging and pleading for illegals? How much is Durbin (and the other tooth fairies) receiving I wonder!!?? Is there any time left to do any actual legislating for the American citizens? Why have we elected these belligerent mules and what are we going to do to remedy the situation? How many more amnesty alarms will be sounded in the dead of night? If at first they don't succeed that's no reason to say the bill is done. Try a second and a twenty-second time, as long as the bill gets passed.

Durbin dosent have enough clout and besides.. there isnt enough sugar in the entire South America to sweeten this deal

It dosnt matter how much lipstick you put on this pig... "It's still a pig"

Durbin is up for re-election in '08. According to Wikipedia these are his announced opponents:

Norm Hill (R)
Andy Martin (R)
Jim Nalepa (R)
Mike Psak (R)
Jim Rowe (R)
Steve Sauerberg (R)

Is there any chance of un-seating him?

This is what I told the Senator in response to this ridiculous propaganda statement just yesterday:

[color=brown]Dear Honorable Senator Durbin,

I watched CSPAN yesterday and I can appreciate your statements regarding the health concerns of children. What I didn't appreciate was this statement you made at a different time referring to the DREAM ACT:

“We shouldn’t punish children for the mistakes their parents made. That’s not the American way,â€

The bottom line is the "Dream" Act is still a huge amnesty with chain migration, full of loopholes and waivers, that is fundamentally unfair to American middle class students and foreign students and others waiting in line to enter our country the legal, proper way. Also, it is outrageous that Durbin is cynically trying to attach this controversial measure to the Defense Bill. There are of course, many other good reasons to oppose the "Dream" act as well.

Please hammer home these points in your calls. You can bet the well-funded pro-amnesty special interests are calling this weekend, so I hope our grass roots side is too (and on Monday morning!).