The United States is a nation of immigrants, with the clear exception of Native Americans. However, the newest wave of the \tired masses,"" regardless of country of origin, has not been met with open arms. It has been consistently greeted with hostility, fear and discrimination from the group that has been here just long enough to no longer consider itself immigrants.
Fear and myths have often led to the creation of short-sighted, xenophobic U.S. immigration policy. Beginning with the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882, immigration policy has become increasingly closed and biased against peoples of specific countries. From the 1920s through World War II, immigration quotas were set based on country of origin and virtually prohibited anyone of Asian origin from legally entering the United States Discriminatory policies can often be manifested in other ways-such as through the acceptance of refugees.
Legislation crafted in 1986 and 1996 created large setbacks for refuges and immigrants overall. The 1996 act, among other new restrictions, took away the power of people to challenge the INS in court for mistreatment.
The 2001 Patriot Act encroaches on the civil liberties of all citizens but has particularly hurt the foreign-born and represents a return to the overtly discriminatory legislation prevalent earlier in the century.
Despite this dismal history, new arrivals to the U.S. have been tenacious, determined and eventually successful. In the process, they have brought much to the country culturally, economically and intellectually. Occasionally, a policy comes along that is so logical and necessary that it receives bipartisan support. The Dream act is such a policy.
The Dream act addresses the plight of the children of illegal immigrants who have grown up in the United States and graduated from high school, but have limited opportunities because their legal status was conferred on them by their parents. Originally introduced by Sens. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, and Richard Durbin, D-Ill. the bill is two-fold. It calls for the elimination of a provision of a law enacted in 1996 that currently requires lawful immigration status in order to qualify for any post secondary education benefit based on state residency, and it allows young people to eventually apply for lawful residency and citizenship.
The bill already has a diverse range of support, including 15 cosponsors in the U.S. Senate, while the companion house bill, the Student Adjustment Act, has 66 cosponsors.
The Dream act will give states back the power to allow high school graduates of illegal-immigrant parents to receive in-state college tuition. Students who arrived in the U.S. before their 16th birthday and have lived in the US for a minimum of five years are also eligible to receive permanent resident status. Additionally, they must go through a conditional, temporary resident period before qualifying for lawful permanent resident status.
While the Dream act is an important piece of legislation, the action of individual states is still vital. Nine states have already passed state-level versions of the act, including California, Texas and several of the other top five most immigrant-dense states. Wisconsin Assembly Bill 95, the in-state tuition portion of the Dream act, was introduced by a range of representatives including Mark Pocan, D-Madison, and is scheduled for a hearing Oct. 29 at 9 a.m.
Fear and discrimination toward immigrants and the resulting policies are based on myth. The most common fear is that limited and valuable resources and jobs are being taken by the new arrivals. In reality, new immigrants take jobs most U.S. citizens do not want and actually contribute more in taxes than they receive in social services. Most illegal immigrants work and pay social security but are not eligible for any state benefits. Economic experts have also found that immigrants create more jobs than they fill. They form new businesses, raise the productivity of already established businesses and invest capital.
A 1994 study by Ohio University researchers found ""no statistically meaningful relationship between immigration and unemployment...[I]f there is any correlation, it would appear to be negative: higher immigration is associated with lower unemployment."" People who come here, whether legally or illegally, come for opportunity-not handouts. The United States is not a social welfare state.
Assembly Bill 95 is only a small piece of legislation, but it will benefit hundreds of young people with little cost to the state. Benefiting young people will contribute far more to the state in terms of intellectual power and talent. It is a simple measure intended to at least somewhat level the playing field for immigrants.
Many groups have already been working on behalf of the Assembly bill 95, including Voces de la Frontera, a Milwaukee-based immigrant-rights center, and the United Council. Many Madison residents are supportive of the bill. A state-wide weekend of action is scheduled for Oct. 18 to show support.
