You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
information
- Thread starter hayire
- Start date
Depends what college.
Try to go to a state where they offer instate tuition.
For your answer yes...he still qulifies, he can go to college, but he won't get financial aid unless he has a SSN. He could apply for some scholarships, but those are going to be hard to find.
Try to go to a state where they offer instate tuition.
For your answer yes...he still qulifies, he can go to college, but he won't get financial aid unless he has a SSN. He could apply for some scholarships, but those are going to be hard to find.
does anyone knows.. about the dream act in AZ??
hello im in the situation that if the dream act is passed i'll be in the condition to get into college and work and everything cuz i have my HS diploma and i wanna go to college .. im here in AZ but i wanna know if that law is already approved in AZ cuz i know that in new mexico it is . and in other 3 states... could you tell me more aobut that??? please and if its passed what do i need to do in order to apply?? thanks
hello im in the situation that if the dream act is passed i'll be in the condition to get into college and work and everything cuz i have my HS diploma and i wanna go to college .. im here in AZ but i wanna know if that law is already approved in AZ cuz i know that in new mexico it is . and in other 3 states... could you tell me more aobut that??? please and if its passed what do i need to do in order to apply?? thanks
DREAM ACT has not "passed"
The DREAM Act has not only not passed, it has not even been introduced in Congress for action.
The laws you are referring to are State laws granting in-state tuition. The legality of these laws is being tested in a court case in Kansas.
The state laws give you no status, no right to work, and no access to federal funding for tuition. If you do graduate from college, you will still not be able to work legally. Federal law governs immigration, no matter what state laws try to do.
Also, the last time I saw the text of the DREAM Act, it would be limited to those who came to the U.S. before the age of 16, and who had been here at least 5 years. This may have changed, but it means if you came here at age 16 or older, or were here less than 5 years at the time the law is enacted (if it is enacted), then you are not eligible. I don't recall if there is any upper age limit.
Bear in mind--this bill was introduced last session of Congress and went nowhere. The climate this year is not any better, and very likely worse.
The DREAM Act has not only not passed, it has not even been introduced in Congress for action.
The laws you are referring to are State laws granting in-state tuition. The legality of these laws is being tested in a court case in Kansas.
The state laws give you no status, no right to work, and no access to federal funding for tuition. If you do graduate from college, you will still not be able to work legally. Federal law governs immigration, no matter what state laws try to do.
Also, the last time I saw the text of the DREAM Act, it would be limited to those who came to the U.S. before the age of 16, and who had been here at least 5 years. This may have changed, but it means if you came here at age 16 or older, or were here less than 5 years at the time the law is enacted (if it is enacted), then you are not eligible. I don't recall if there is any upper age limit.
Bear in mind--this bill was introduced last session of Congress and went nowhere. The climate this year is not any better, and very likely worse.
Last edited by a moderator:
that's not true at all, please do not scare these children like that. IF you've been waching CSPAN, there was an immigration pow-wow earlier this week, and one republican conservative surely stated that the immigration debate this year in imminent, of course we don't know how this forthcoming showdown will play out, only time will tell. The DREAM ACT may fall into the immigration reform mainstream, and I"m not personally thrill about this because the DREAM has the risk of getting lost in the whole mish-mash of anti-immigrant and pro-immigrant proposals. On the oher hand, the fact that the REAL ID is poised to walk through the senate next week, it purportedly gives the DREAM so much better chances of passage because the right-wing conservatives would be satisfied. nevertheless, there are a lot of republicans for the DREAM ACT. The DREAM ACT has not passed, it is supposed to re-enter the senate this week or so, the situation is stagnant, I can say it is the same or slightly better, but defenitely not worse, it is just unclear. Hopefully the DREAM will come through on its own so it can be tacked onto a must-pass bill just like the REAL ID was.
"scaring" children
The "children" ought to have facts, not just your opinion, Hayire. They need to learn to make their own decisions, and take responsibility for their own lives, including the possibility that they may not get their "Dream".
You talk about probabilities of passage this year, but the same thing was said last year when the bill was introduced, and as I said, the bill went nowhere. That is fact. You may be right in your guess about what will happen this year, or not. Until the bill is actually law, these "children" must deal with the situation they're in. Hiding their heads in the sand to the possibility that the bill might not pass does not help them.
The "children" ought to have facts, not just your opinion, Hayire. They need to learn to make their own decisions, and take responsibility for their own lives, including the possibility that they may not get their "Dream".
You talk about probabilities of passage this year, but the same thing was said last year when the bill was introduced, and as I said, the bill went nowhere. That is fact. You may be right in your guess about what will happen this year, or not. Until the bill is actually law, these "children" must deal with the situation they're in. Hiding their heads in the sand to the possibility that the bill might not pass does not help them.
Last edited by a moderator:
DREAM Act
What Grunggy is apparently unaware of is that if a bill is not passed in the session of Congress in which it is introduced, then it must be re-introduced in a subsequent session of Congress. The Hatch bill for the DREAM Act died in last year's session of Congress and must be re-introduced in this session. It has not been, yet. Nor will it necessarily have the same form as in past years, the postings Grunggy cited above.
Furthermore, to become law, it must be passed by BOTH the House and the Senate.
What Grunggy is apparently unaware of is that if a bill is not passed in the session of Congress in which it is introduced, then it must be re-introduced in a subsequent session of Congress. The Hatch bill for the DREAM Act died in last year's session of Congress and must be re-introduced in this session. It has not been, yet. Nor will it necessarily have the same form as in past years, the postings Grunggy cited above.
Furthermore, to become law, it must be passed by BOTH the House and the Senate.
You're right. I was told that the reason the bill did't get to a vote floor was because it was an election year, and it was risky for some republicans who were running for re-election. This year there isn't such as thing, that's why they have to pass it this year, because next year will be election year as well, so that has to give them some hope.
Last edited by a moderator:
Congress
From what I've been reading, AgJobs is the most likely immigration bill to be introduced in Congress because it has strong bipartisan support. It's sponsored by both Ted Kennedy (D) and John McCain (R). However, they tried to attach it to the same appropriations bill the Real ID Act was attached to, and couldn't get enough support. (They need at least 60 votes in the Senate.) Even if AgJobs makes it through the Senate, it still needs to get through the House, where there is likely to be more opposition. And of course, there's always the question about Dubya's position on it. He doesn't favor amnesty, which AgJobs is.
From what I've been reading, AgJobs is the most likely immigration bill to be introduced in Congress because it has strong bipartisan support. It's sponsored by both Ted Kennedy (D) and John McCain (R). However, they tried to attach it to the same appropriations bill the Real ID Act was attached to, and couldn't get enough support. (They need at least 60 votes in the Senate.) Even if AgJobs makes it through the Senate, it still needs to get through the House, where there is likely to be more opposition. And of course, there's always the question about Dubya's position on it. He doesn't favor amnesty, which AgJobs is.
the AGJOBS was introduced but it was voted down, I already knew it was going to happen because it was sort of ammesty.The DREAM is diffirent, I don't think the members of senete are going to be so inhuman and cold-hartened as to deny these children a future. I'm positive the DREAM can make it through the senate, but I'm doubtful on how it stands in the house, I know there are republicans who oppose it and other ones who support it, the real kicker is that we don't know which is the majority.And as to president Bush, he once said in a quote that if the bill gets to his desk he will sign it. My point is that the DREAM is a whole different case from the AGJOBS, they know these children are americans culture-wise and that they are going anywhre, so they can't just cut them off.
"Americans"
Arguing that these "children" are Americans "culture wise" really doesn't hold water when you consider that Mr. Hamdi, who was arrested for terrorist activities, was considered an American just because he was born here, even though his parents were Saudis and he hadn't set foot in the U.S. since infancy.
Arguing that these "children" are Americans "culture wise" really doesn't hold water when you consider that Mr. Hamdi, who was arrested for terrorist activities, was considered an American just because he was born here, even though his parents were Saudis and he hadn't set foot in the U.S. since infancy.
And just what does that mean?
And how would you know? Think of all the people who give birth here, then take the kid back to their homelands. Koreans actually have organized tourist trips for pregnant Korean women to come here, give birth, and take the kid home. Same thing happens with Mexican middle class women who take their kids home. And heaven knows how many others. Are all these kids "Americans"? How many are or will be terrorists?
The point is, we still consider these children Americans even though they were not raised in our culture, and have not necessarily learned its customs and values. We consider place of birth more important than culture. If it isn't, then why all the fuss over doing away with birthright citizenship?
And how would you know? Think of all the people who give birth here, then take the kid back to their homelands. Koreans actually have organized tourist trips for pregnant Korean women to come here, give birth, and take the kid home. Same thing happens with Mexican middle class women who take their kids home. And heaven knows how many others. Are all these kids "Americans"? How many are or will be terrorists?
The point is, we still consider these children Americans even though they were not raised in our culture, and have not necessarily learned its customs and values. We consider place of birth more important than culture. If it isn't, then why all the fuss over doing away with birthright citizenship?