- Joined
- Jul 21, 2005
- Messages
- 51,667
- Reaction score
- 35,452
- Location
- Washington, DC
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
For those that recall, the Dream Act is kind of the thing that started the DACA ball rolling. It was put forward, but failed, and from the ashes of it's failure rose DACA because congress didn't "act" in the way desired by President Obama. Now, DACA has been rescinded, but Trump is demanding Congress take some sort of action regarding "dreamers". However, the issue remains a contentious one between both sides. As such, I would like to explore this hypothetical situation.
The Dream Act is revived, but altered to only allow for volunteer federal service to allow the pathway to RESIDENCY. As such, it would mean:
Requirements to be considered
- Not have entered the United States on a non-immigrant visa- Have proof of having arrived in the United States before age 16
- Have proof of residence in the United States for at least five consecutive years since their date of arrival
- If male, have registered with the Selective Service
- Be between the ages of 12 and 35 at the time of bill enactment
- Have graduated from an American high school, obtained a GED, or been admitted to an institution of higher education
- Be of good moral character
- Have a clean background check
Over the next 6 years the individual would be granted conditional residency, and would need to serve at least 2 years in the U.S. Military or the Peace Corps, while maintaining a clean criminal history.
If at the end of those 6 years they have completed the required 2 years (if discharged, it must be honorable, and must be after 2 years) of federal volunteer service, and continue to have a clean background check, then they will be granted permanent residency.
--------
This removes the "go to college, get to stay here permanently" feature. It now makes service to the country, be it militarily or humanitarianly, as the singular passage way to gaining residency. This provides an option for these individuals if they truly do wish to stay within this country in a legal fashion, while at the same time provides a tangible benefit to the nation via their volunteer service while not essentially rewarding them for something as disconnected from the country and self-rewarding to begin with as it relates to college.
So, what say you....?
Republicans/Conservatives, would the service requirement being the only pathway provide a reasonable enough middle ground for you to get on board with such an act?
Democrats/Liberals, would the college pathway being removed make this a non-starter, or do you feel that a compromised option is better than drawing an "all or nothing" line in the sand?
The Dream Act is revived, but altered to only allow for volunteer federal service to allow the pathway to RESIDENCY. As such, it would mean:
Requirements to be considered
- Not have entered the United States on a non-immigrant visa- Have proof of having arrived in the United States before age 16
- Have proof of residence in the United States for at least five consecutive years since their date of arrival
- If male, have registered with the Selective Service
- Be between the ages of 12 and 35 at the time of bill enactment
- Have graduated from an American high school, obtained a GED, or been admitted to an institution of higher education
- Be of good moral character
- Have a clean background check
Over the next 6 years the individual would be granted conditional residency, and would need to serve at least 2 years in the U.S. Military or the Peace Corps, while maintaining a clean criminal history.
If at the end of those 6 years they have completed the required 2 years (if discharged, it must be honorable, and must be after 2 years) of federal volunteer service, and continue to have a clean background check, then they will be granted permanent residency.
--------
This removes the "go to college, get to stay here permanently" feature. It now makes service to the country, be it militarily or humanitarianly, as the singular passage way to gaining residency. This provides an option for these individuals if they truly do wish to stay within this country in a legal fashion, while at the same time provides a tangible benefit to the nation via their volunteer service while not essentially rewarding them for something as disconnected from the country and self-rewarding to begin with as it relates to college.
So, what say you....?
Republicans/Conservatives, would the service requirement being the only pathway provide a reasonable enough middle ground for you to get on board with such an act?
Democrats/Liberals, would the college pathway being removed make this a non-starter, or do you feel that a compromised option is better than drawing an "all or nothing" line in the sand?