DreamActivist.Org

Spokesman-Review (Washington)

Distributed by McClatchy-Tribune Business News

October 28, 2007 Sunday

Path to a dream: While Congress wrestles over immigration reform, U.S.-raised children of illegal immigrants work to achieve their goals at local universities

BYLINE: Kevin Graman, The Spokesman-Review, Spokane, Wash.

SECTION: STATE AND REGIONAL NEWS

LENGTH: 1827 words

Oct. 28–A teenage girl studying entrepreneurship at Washington State University would be on her way to realizing the American Dream, except she is not American.

Mercedes grew up poor in a small Central Washington farm town, studied hard, and despite having to work part time, the Running Start student graduated from high school with a 3.8 grade-point average and an associate’s degree from Big Bend Community College in Moses Lake.

Like other 18-year-olds starting college this fall, Mercedes is motivated by personal ambition. She wants to own a business so that she can provide jobs to other Latinos. But because she was brought to the United States from Mexico by her parents when she was 2 — and is here illegally — she has, since she was very young, lived in fear of being detected and deported to a native country she has never known.

“I always worried that immigration (officers) would come if I didn’t excel,” she said.

Last week, the U.S. Senate voted whether to end debate on a bill that would grant her — and as many as 65,000 students a year like her, the U.S.-raised offspring of illegal immigrants — legal residency while she pursues her degree. Its bipartisan sponsors fell eight votes short of the 60 needed to bring the Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors Act to a vote.

It is the DREAM Act to those supporters in Congress who say children should not be punished for the actions of their parents. It is the Bad Dream Act to opponents who say it rewards illegal behavior with amnesty.

Among the latter is William Gheen, president of North Carolina-based Americans for Legal Immigration, a political action committee that claims to have played a critical role in convincing lawmakers to kill the measure this year.

“It is unfair to American students and unfair to American families,” Gheen said. “It would replace American students in limited college seats at taxpayer expense.”

Adding insult to injury, he said, “is that supporters are trying to use children and students as political pawns for a broader amnesty. Not everybody in America gets to go to college, and Americans have a generational tax-burden birthright to those seats.”

Locally, the Spokane County Republican Party tasked a working group to come up with an immigration reform proposal. The group recently presented its ideas — including expansion of the agricultural visa program for farm workers — to 5th District Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers.

“We oppose any amnesty for people who have entered the country illegally,” said Gretchen McDevitt, a member of the working group. “If we granted amnesty to all of these people, it’s overwhelming to our country in terms of cost and how it would change our country.”

With the nation engaged in contentious debate over immigration, advocates of the DREAM Act say it is unfair to keep these children in limbo while comprehensive reform is resolved.

“All they are guilty of is obeying their parents,” said Ricardo Sanchez, chairman of the board of directors of the Latino Educational Achievement Project, which is dedicated to improving the academic achievement of Latinos in Washington. “When we take the time to explain that to fair-minded people, most agree with us that of course we must allow them to get an education, if for no other reason than to repay the investment we have already made in them.”

Cristina Gaeta, who works for the U.S. Department of Education’s College Assistance Migrant Program at WSU, estimates there are about 360,000 illegal high school graduates in the United States. It is unknown how many Washington high school students are here illegally because schools are not permitted to ask students about their residency status.

But over the past 20 years, non-Hispanic white student rolls have grown 8 percent while Latino rolls have grown 268 percent, Sanchez said.

“They have always been welcome in the fields,” Sanchez said. Now that they are graduating from high school, “what should we say to them — that’s all we have for them?”

No public loans or scholarships

Besides granting conditional residency status to young persons who attend college or serve in the military, the DREAM Act would eliminate federal provisions that discourage states from offering illegal immigrants in-state tuition. Washington is one of 10 states that already do.

In 2003, then-Washington Gov. Gary Locke signed House Bill 1079 expanding the definition of a resident student to include any student who has the equivalent of a high school diploma from Washington; has attended at least three years of high school in the state; and is not a citizen of the United States but submits an affidavit to the institution stating an intent to file an application for permanent U.S. residency.

WSU had 36 such students file under the 1079 program this year, while Eastern Washington University had 31 students.

The University of Idaho does not keep track of how many illegal immigrants it may have enrolled.

Though the Washington law makes college more affordable for “1079 students,” many obstacles remain in their way. They are ineligible for publicly funded loans or scholarships, internships or work study.

Mercedes and three illegal immigrants who attend Eastern Washington University agreed to be interviewed for this report under the condition that their real names not be used. All four are the first in their families to attend college.

Mercedes: parents took second jobs

“My parents were so proud of me,” Mercedes said. “They didn’t care how much money it cost as long as I could be a role model for my two younger brothers and little sister.”

Both her father, who works at a full-time job on a Grant County orchard, and her mother, a seasonal orchard worker, took second jobs to send her to college. Her father also sold his pickup and property he owned in Mexico for her education.

Mercedes also worked two jobs, as a cherry checker at an orchard and as a clerk in a Mexican grocery. She said her family has always paid taxes, has never been on welfare and never received food stamps.

It was only after arriving at Washington State University that she learned she was eligible for private scholarships.

Ramon: ‘We are bettering ourselves’

Ramon, a 19-year-old junior in sociology at EWU, would like to become a high school counselor so that he can help other Latino students achieve what he has.

The son of orchard workers, Ramon graduated from Zillah High school in 2005 with a 3.25 grade-point average. He had a perfect average at his school in Michoacan, Mexico, but had to work hard to overcome a language barrier when his parents brought him to the United States at age 14.

He also participated in cross country, track, drama and science club.

He was fortunate to have had a counselor and a teacher in high school who helped him obtain a scholarship from the Washington Apple Education Foundation, which is available from the tree fruit industry.

Last year Ramon received a full ride from the College Success Foundation’s Leadership 1,000, which provides four-year college scholarships to 1,000 economically disadvantaged students.

Passage of the DREAM Act would have allowed him to apply for the federally-funded McNair Scholars Program, which helps underprivileged students go to graduate school.

He asks what opponents of the DREAM Act would do in his position.

“It’s not like we are getting a degree in crime; we are bettering ourselves,” Ramon said.

Carmen: without a country

Carmen, a 24-year-old EWU graduate student in social work, has no country to return to. She was born in Veracruz, Mexico, but only because her father landed there in the 1980s after fleeing civil war in his native El Salvador.

Her Salvadoran-born brother has obtained “temporary protected status” from the U.S. Department of Justice, but because she was not born in El Salvador, she is not eligible.

Her father, who is now a welder, brought her to Tacoma in 1997 to be reunited with family members. She graduated from Henry Foss High School in 2003 with a 3.4 GPA. With a College Success Foundation scholarship and a Washington State Achievers Scholarship through the Gates Foundation, she obtained her undergraduate degree in Spanish and social work at EWU in the spring.

Now Carmen has a graduate assistantship, which waives tuition, but she cannot receive a stipend because she has no Social Security number.

“My father is worried about me,” she said. “He was hoping for the DREAM Act.”

Patty: ’someone’s daughter’

Patty, 21, a junior in government at EWU, also was born in Michoacan. Her parents brought her and her four siblings to the United States when she was 7 years old. Her family lived in poverty in Mexico and her grandparents, who immigrated earlier, paid their way to Mattawa, Wash., where her father began picking asparagus.

Now her father is a full-time crew foreman and her mother works seasonally in the orchards.

When she started school, Patty said, other students had to translate for her, but she overcame that to graduate from Wahluke High School with a 3.4 GPA in 2005. She obtained a Paul Lauzier Scholarship, which is available to Grant County students. She also is working her way through school using a fake Social Security number.

“Being undocumented is one of the biggest problems in my life,” Patty said. “Now I don’t know where I will end up.”

She wants to go to Gonzaga Law School, so she can one day help other Latinos with immigration problems, but she worries because the law school will not permit first-year students to work. If she graduates, she will have to be a legal resident to take the Washington State Bar exam.

“People should think about us as human beings and stop making us out as criminals,” Patty said. “I am someone’s daughter. We are brothers and sisters. We are like anyone else.”

Step by step DREAM Act provisions

To qualify for immigration relief under the DREAM Act, a student must have been brought to the U.S. more than 5 years ago when he or she was 15 years old or younger and must be able to demonstrate good moral character.

Once such a student graduates from high school, he or she would be permitted to apply for conditional status, which would authorize up to 6 years of legal residence.

During the 6-year period, the student would be required to graduate from a 2-year college, complete at least 2 years towards a 4-year degree, or serve in the U.S. military for at least 2 years.

Permanent residence would be granted at the end of the 6-year period if the student has met these requirements and continued to maintain good moral character.

Source: National Immigration Law Center

Los Angeles Times
October 25, 2007 Thursday
Home Edition
The Nation;
Still no give on immigration issue;
Bill offering citizenship for the young can’t muster enough votes.

BYLINE: Nicole Gaouette, Johanna Neuman, Times Staff Writers

SECTION: MAIN NEWS; National Desk; Part A; Pg. 1

LENGTH: 1201 words

DATELINE: WASHINGTON

The Senate on Wednesday rejected a bill offering the children of illegal immigrants a path to citizenship if they serve in the military or complete two years of higher education. The defeat of the measure, which had attracted bipartisan support, underscored the difficulty of enacting even a narrowly tailored proposal in the polarizing atmosphere surrounding immigration reform.

The vote on the proposal was 52 to 44, short of the 60-vote margin needed to prevent a filibuster and begin debate. It was one small piece of a comprehensive immigration bill that collapsed in the Senate earlier this year, and it sparked a brief but heated debate.

Opponents called the bill a form of amnesty and argued that it would create incentives for illegal immigrants to cross the border with their children. But Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.), who supported the measure, said that “to turn on these children and treat them as criminals is an indication of the level of emotion and, in some cases, bigotry and hatred that is involved in this debate.”

His remarks were directed at Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.), who on Tuesday suggested that immigrants who had attended a meeting in Durbin’s office were illegal and should have been arrested.

Tancredo, a presidential candidate who has staked his campaign on tough immigration enforcement, dismissed Durbin’s understanding of the issue: “I don’t expect Dick Durbin to be able to tell the difference between legal residents and illegal aliens.”

The debate on Capitol Hill suggested that the public outrage kicked up last summer when the Senate considered comprehensive immigration reform was still driving the political agenda.

Proponents of the Dream Act — the Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors Act — had hoped it would be one of several less-ambitious changes to the nation’s immigration law to pass this year.

But Wednesday’s defeat signaled that any further attempts to help illegal immigrants might have to be balanced with action to increase border security or enforcement.

“All of America’s awake on this one,” said Sen. James M. Inhofe (R-Okla.), suggesting amnesty was the end game of the measure that failed Wednesday. “They know exactly what we’re doing.”

The environment has become so poisonous that Durbin, in a news conference after the vote, thanked not only the Republicans who joined his effort but also the Democrats who he said “stood by me on this.”

He noted that some Democrats voted for the bill “with pain in their eyes,” knowing that their action would provoke anger from voters.

The Dream Act would give conditional legal status to illegal immigrants who have lived in the United States at least five years and entered the country before age 16. They must graduate from high school, have no criminal record and have a “good moral character.”

If these immigrants serve in the military or complete two years of higher education, the conditional status would be lifted. After five years, they could apply for citizenship.

Estimates vary as to the number of young illegal immigrants the bill would affect. The Congressional Budget Office has put it at fewer than 100,000, while the nonpartisan Migration Policy Institute has estimated it at closer to 500,000.

Some proponents tried to cast the vote in a positive light. They noted that the four absent senators, including Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), had all vowed to support the measure, meaning it was closer to the needed 60 votes.

And, they said, the 2008 elections might send a message to vocal opponents that opposing immigration reform is not the winning issue they think it is.

“We’re going through a period of time when there is a sense of panic among politicians,” said Josh Bernstein, federal policy director for the Los Angeles-based National Immigration Law Center. “When the election comes, politicians will be surprised. Immigration was supposed to be the savior of Republicans in the last election, but that didn’t happen. I don’t think it will happen again.”

Some signs of bipartisanship were evident Wednesday. Twelve Republicans defied their party by voting to begin debate. And Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Texas) announced that she and Durbin were working on an approach that might attract more GOP support — requiring, in addition to military service or attendance in college, a longer wait for citizenship.

But the White House played hardball on the issue, releasing a statement outlining its objections. “The administration is sympathetic to the position of young people who were brought here illegally as children and have come to know the United States as home,” said a statement from the White House Office of Management and Budget. “Any resolution of their status, however, must be careful not to provide incentives for recurrence of the illegal conduct that has brought the nation to this point.”

Democrats argued that there was a moral imperative to pass the bill, saying that skilled graduates would benefit American business and that the young people who enlisted would provide a much-needed boost to a military struggling to meet recruitment goals.

“Children should not be penalized for the actions of their parents,” said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.). “Many of the children this bill addresses came here when they were very young. Many don’t even remember their home countries or speak the language of their home countries. They are just as loyal and devoted to our country as any American.”

Republicans objected to the timing of the debate as well as the bill’s substance. Some complained that the Senate still had overdue spending bills to pass.

“We’ve yet to send a single appropriations bill,” said Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), pointing out that none of the 12 annual bills had made it to the president’s desk.

He said that the Internet tax moratorium expired in “exactly one week,” and that 50 million taxpayers could become ensnared in a confusing and costly tangle if Congress did not address the alternative minimum tax. “We have an enormous amount of work, and we’re running out of time,” he said.

Others, like Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), said the immigration bill was flawed, complaining that its beneficiaries would not be required to earn a college degree.

Some who had been supportive of the measure when Durbin brought it up on previous occasions were unenthusiastic. “Even though there’s merit in the goal of the Dream Act, I feel this should be part of a comprehensive approach,” said Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.).

Durbin countered that those affected by the bill would have very limited ability to sponsor family members to come to the U.S. and would not qualify for in-state tuition or federal aid.

And he implored the Senate not to ignore the talents and patriotism of children whose only crime was to pack their suitcases when their parents told them to.

“Don’t turn around and tell me tomorrow you need H-1B immigration visas to bring in talented people to America because we don’t have enough,” Durbin said. “Don’t take your anger on illegal immigration out on children who have nothing to say about this. They were brought to this country. . . . They’ve beaten the odds. We need them.”

–

nicole.gaouette@latimes.com

johanna.neuman@latimes.com

Daily News (New York)
October 25, 2007 Thursday
SPORTS FINAL EDITION
SHAMELESS PREZ WANNA-BE TRIES TO ROB KIDS OF DREAM

BYLINE: BY ALBOR RUIZ

SECTION: SUBURBAN; Pg. 4

LENGTH: 576 words

TOM TANCREDO wants to be your President.

No, wait, don’t laugh - the man is serious. There is no reason for alarm, though. The Republican senator from Colorado has as much chance of getting to the White House as hell has of freezing over.

Tancredo’s name is associated with the most rabid immigration reform enemies in the country, and their shameful theatrics and hysteria. And nothing else. He has no other claim to fame.

On Tuesday, the good senator, who has said that Americans who favor rational immigration reform are “leftist activists” who endanger national security, outdid even himself when he called on Immigration and Customs Enforcement to detain three college students.

The students - two from Germany and one from Costa Rica - have lived in the U.S. for more than 10 years, and were participating in an afternoon news conference on Capitol Hill held by Sen. Richard Durbin (D-Ill.) about the Dream Act.

Durbin is the main sponsor of the act, which was defeated in the Senate yesterday. Despite a majority of senators voting in favor - among them New York’s Hillary Clinton and Chuck Schumer - the bill was eight votes short of the 60 needed for approval.

The Dream Act is a smart and humane bill that addresses the tragedy of young people who, brought to the U.S. by their parents, grew up in this country. Except for not having papers, they are as American as any other kid their age. Yet their futures are uncertain.

If the Dream Act is ever enacted - a doubtful proposition, to say the least - it would allow these undocumented students to apply for legal status as long as they are attending college. It would give them the same opportunity if they join the Army.

Yet Tancredo, himself the grandchild of Italian immigrants, is a tough guy who is all for persecution and repression. And he contacted the immigration authorities to demand a raid of Durbin’s office.

Not surprisingly, Durbin was not pleased.

“Congressman, have you no shame?” he asked Tancredo in a written statement, comparing him to the infamous Sen. Joseph McCarthy and his anti-Communist witch hunts of the 1950s.

It is a sad spectacle to watch Republican presidential contenders tripping over each other to show voters who is the fastest gun in the West when it comes to illegal immigration. It is sad not only because it shows the worst kind of opportunism, but because there is nothing “tough” or “brave” about persecuting the undocumented - who, after all is said and done, are the most vulnerable and powerless segment of society.

Calling Tancredo’s action “absolutely stunning,” Durbin asked another important question: “What does it say about America that a member of Congress would call on these young people to be arrested? I don’t think they should be arrested. They should be given a chance.”

They certainly should. Not doing so would send them into a life in the shadows, but more importantly, it would be our loss as a society.

There are 65,000 undocumented children who graduate every year from high school but have no opportunity of working legally or getting financial aid for college.

The Dream Act would give them the opportunity to meet their potential and to fully contribute to our society. This, of course, is not only good for them, but good for America.

The country needs solutions, not prejudices and dehumanizing of immigrants.

Let’s be thankful that Tom Tancredo has as much chance of getting to the White House as hell has of freezing over. aruiz@nydailynews.com

USA TODAY
October 25, 2007 Thursday
FINAL EDITION
Senate shies away from immigration issue;
Vote dampens DREAM Act, aimed at youths

BYLINE: Kathy Kiely

SECTION: NEWS; Pg. 4A

LENGTH: 1048 words

WASHINGTON — The Senate signaled a desire to steer clear of divisive immigration issues Wednesday by refusing to take up legislation that would provide safe harbor for young adults who grew up in the USA after being brought here illegally by their parents.

The 52-44 vote — eight short of the 60 needed to move the bill toward a final vote — came as three potential beneficiaries of the legislation, known as the DREAM Act, looked on from the Senate gallery. It provided a stark example of how hostile the climate has become to immigration measures since a sweeping bill backed by President Bush failed last June.

“Since when in America do we visit the sins and crimes of parents on their children?” said Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., the bill’s sponsor.

In bringing the DREAM (Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors) Act to the floor, Durbin said he was reviving “the most bipartisan” element in the larger immigration bill. Last year, the Judiciary Committee approved it unanimously.

Wednesday’s debate indicated that attitudes have shifted.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., called the DREAM Act “a divisive issue.” Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., said it “will strike a dagger in the will of the American people” to debate it. The White House, which Durbin said insisted on including the DREAM Act in this year’s comprehensive immigration bill, issued a statement opposing it.

And one of the bill’s co-sponsors, Sen. Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, voted against it. Spokeswoman Susan Wheeler said Crapo objected to parliamentary procedures that would have limited chances to amend the bill. Eight Democrats also voted no.

“The debate has changed a lot,” Durbin said. “There’s a genuine political fear about this issue.”

Durbin, the deputy Democratic leader of the Senate, said the DREAM Act’s failure will dampen his enthusiasm for business-backed immigration measures that the Senate likely will consider soon. Major corporations, such as Microsoft, and trade associations, such as the Western Growers Association, are seeking to expand visas for temporary foreign workers in fields ranging from farming to computer design.

“If you’re going to turn away all these children … don’t come back to me and tell me that we need a bigger labor pool and more talent in America,” Durbin told his colleagues. Sen. Robert Menendez, D-N.J., said the vote was a “litmus test” of congressional willingness to move ahead on other immigration issues.

“If we can’t do this for children,” Menendez said, “I doubt we can do anything else for immigration reform.”

The DREAM Act would have protected certain children of illegal immigrants from deportation and qualified young adults up to age 30 for permanent legal status if they completed at least two years of either postsecondary education or military service.

Opponents argued that the age of the children when they crossed the border doesn’t change their status. “This is an amnesty bill,” said Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla. “We’re talking about people who came into this country illegally, regardless of age.”

Disagreements over the DREAM Act crossed party lines. Sen. Mel Martinez, R-Fla., worked with Durbin and Sen. Ken Salazar, D-Colo., to persuade Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, to back the bill. Hutchison announced she’d back the DREAM Act if Durbin agreed to let her add an amendment tightening its provisions. “I think there is a compassionate reason for us to try to work this out,” said Hutchinson, one of 12 Republicans who voted for the bill.

The potential DREAM Act beneficiaries who listened to the debate from the Senate gallery remained upbeat.

“I’m still hopeful. I know something has to happen,” said Marie Gonzalez, a political science major at Westminster College in Missouri.

Gonzalez said it was “tough” hearing the bill described as amnesty for illegal immigrants. “It’s hard for me to listen and be categorized that way,” Gonzalez said. “If you could just meet me, maybe you can change your mind.”

How senators voted

Here’s how senators voted Wednesday on whether to consider the DREAM Act.

Sixty “yes” votes were needed to bring the bill to the floor:

Voted ‘Yes’ (52)

Democrats (38)

Daniel Akaka, Hawaii; Evan Bayh, Ind.;

Joseph Biden, Del.; Jeff Bingaman, N.M.; Sherrod Brown, Ohio; Maria Cantwell, Wash.; Benjamin Cardin, Md.; Tom Carper, Del.; Robert Casey, Pa.; Hillary Rodham

Clinton, N.Y.; Dick Durbin, Ill.; Russ Feingold, Wis.; Dianne Feinstein, Calif.; Tom Harkin, Iowa; Daniel Inouye, Hawaii; Tim Johnson, S.D.; John Kerry, Mass.; Amy Klobuchar, Minn.; Herb Kohl, Wis.; Frank Lautenberg, N.J.; Patrick Leahy, Vt.; Carl Levin, Mich.; Blanche Lincoln, Ark.; Robert Menendez, N.J.; Barbara Mikulski, Md.; Patty Murray, Wash.; Ben Nelson, Neb.; Bill Nelson, Fla.; Barack Obama, Ill.; Jack Reed, R.I.; Harry Reid, Nev.; Jay Rockefeller, W.Va.;

Ken Salazar, Colo.; Charles Schumer, N.Y.; Debbie Stabenow, Mich.; Jim Webb, Va.; Sheldon Whitehouse, R.I.; Ron Wyden, Ore.

Republicans (12)

Bob Bennett, Utah; Sam Brownback, Kan.; Norm Coleman, Minn.; Susan Collins, Maine; Larry Craig, Idaho; Chuck Hagel, Neb.; Orrin Hatch, Utah; Kay Bailey Hutchison, Texas; Olympia Snowe, Maine; Trent Lott, Miss.; Richard Lugar, Ind.; Mel Martinez, Fla.

Independents (2)

Joe Lieberman, Conn.; Bernie Sanders, Vt.

Voted ‘No’ (44)

Republicans (36)

Lamar Alexander, Tenn.; Wayne Allard, Colo.; John Barrasso, Wyo.; Kit Bond, Mo.; Jim Bunning, Ky.; Richard Burr, N.C.;

Saxby Chambliss, Ga.; Tom Coburn, Okla.; Thad Cochran, Miss.; Bob Corker, Tenn.; John Cornyn, Texas; Mike Crapo, Idaho;

Jim DeMint, S.C.; Elizabeth Dole, N.C.;

Pete Domenici, N.M.; John Ensign, Nev.; Mike Enzi, Wyo.; Lindsey Graham, S.C.; Chuck Grassley, Iowa; Judd Gregg, N.H.; James Inhofe, Okla.; Johnny Isakson, Ga.;

Jon Kyl, Ariz.; Mitch McConnell, Ky.;

Lisa Murkowski, Alaska; Pat Roberts, Kan.; Jeff Sessions, Ala.; Richard Shelby, Ala.;

Gordon Smith, Ore.; Arlen Specter, Pa.;

Ted Stevens, Alaska; John Sununu, N.H.; John Thune, S.D.; David Vitter, La.;

George Voinovich, Ohio; John Warner, Va.

Democrats (8)

Max Baucus, Mont.; Robert Byrd, W.Va.; Kent Conrad, N.D.; Byron Dorgan, N.D.; Mary Landrieu, La.; Claire McCaskill, Mo.; Mark Pryor, Ark.; Jon Tester, Mont.

Not Voting (4)

Democrats (3)

Barbara Boxer, Calif.; Chris Dodd, Conn.;

Edward Kennedy, Mass.

Republican (1)

John McCain, Ariz.

Los Angeles TimesOctober 5, 2007 Friday
Orange County Edition
Students lobby for legal residency;
Train rides and campus protests are among the strategies. A bill that could grant green cards is due to come up in the U.S. Senate this fall.

BYLINE: Jennifer Delson, Times Staff Writer

SECTION: CALIFORNIA; Metro Desk; Part B; Pg. 3

LENGTH: 948 words

Illegal immigrant students boarded rush-hour Metrolink trains in Santa Ana last week to bring attention to pending legislation that could make them eligible for green cards and put them on the path toward U.S. citizenship.

These young adults, brought to the United States by their parents when they were children, tried to explain to commuters why the federal government should give them legal U.S. residency. Without green cards, the students said they could graduate from college but would probably have trouble pursuing professional careers.

Frank Nuez, who has spent 23 of his 24 years in the United States, wore a business suit and boarded the Metrolink train headed to Irvine.

“We want to get the word out, and we want people to see us, to see that we aren’t what people think illegal immigrants look like,” Nuez said. “A lot of people think of an illegal immigrant as Paco who just crossed the border yesterday and is in front of Home Depot looking for work.”

Aboard the train, Nuez approached passengers and said, “Hello, my name is Frank, and I’m an undocumented student,” before lobbying for their support of the proposed federal law.

Nuez and other students around California will spend the next several weeks trying to drum up support with more train rides, teach-ins and campus protests promoting the Dream Act, which stands for Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors. The act is expected to come up for a vote by the full Senate before Nov. 16. Opponents blocked a previous vote on the legislation, denouncing it as a reward for the children of lawbreakers.

“For the next two weeks, we will see a lot of activity from immigrant students on college campuses and in high schools and in the community,” said Horacio Arroyo, who has coordinated statewide Dream Act initiatives for the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles. “They will range from educating undocumented students to what their rights are, to telling them to call their representatives.”

In another Metrolink car, Long Beach State student Jessica De Nova made a confession to a fellow passenger.

“It’s hard for someone to say it,” she said to Greg Ebbensgaard, who was heading home from an Irvine manufacturing job. “But I’m an undocumented student. It’s important for me to say it because I want you to get an image of what we look like.”

Ebbensgaard looked at De Nova, who wore a black blazer and had her hair in a stylish bob, and said he wanted to learn more about the Dream Act.

“We need people like you,” he said. “They always focus on illegal immigrants as criminals. That’s what’s hurting you guys. They should narrow the laws so they just block criminals from getting in the country.”

Other students, such as Carlos, who asked that his last name not be published, were not warmly received. He told commuter Mike Bander, 58, of San Juan Capistrano: “I go to college, and it’s important to me and other undocumented students who are fighting for their dreams that you support the Dream Act.“

Bander, a high school teacher in Huntington Park, was not swayed.

“I’m not against these kids going to school, but our funds are limited, and there are only so many pieces of the pie,” he said. “It’s possible that when they go to college, they take a seat from someone who is a citizen.”

The National Immigration Law Center in Washington estimates that at least 65,000 high school students in the U.S. graduate each year without legal immigration status.

Under the Dream Act, immigrants who have been in the country for at least five years, have a high school diploma and meet other requirements could receive conditional legal residency. Over the next six years, they would have to spend two years in college or the military to qualify for permanent legal residency, a step toward citizenship.

Rick Oltman, spokesman for Californians for Population Stabilization, opposes the legislation and believes it has little chance of passage.

“If we just give the students a break, who will be the next group we will have to give a break to? We’re constantly moving the line,” Oltman said. “It’s unfortunate for these kids . . . but who should feel the discomfort, these kids or American citizens’ kids who feel the discomfort when they take away resources and seats in college classrooms?”

Students across the state are also asking Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to sign the California Dream Act, which would relax some financial aid requirements for undocumented students. The act was approved by the state Legislature on Sept. 11 and remains on the governor’s desk.

At the Korean Resource Center, a campaign is underway to get Los Angeles-area residents to sign postcards that will be sent to members of Congress, said immigrant rights coordinator Yong Ho Kim. The postcards read: “One in five Koreans are undocumented. Please pass the Dream Act so that young people can go to college and achieve their dreams.“

In Orange County, a coalition has prepared a resolution for local city councils. A vote on the Dream Act resolution could be taken in the Santa Ana City Council later this month, said James Johnson, community liaison of the Orange County Dream Team, a coalition of students and allies lobbying for the legislation.

On Oct. 13, the group will perform a 20-minute play at the Breath of Fire Theater in Santa Ana. The play’s title, “Nine Digits Away From My Dream,” refers to the need to have a Social Security number to secure a good job.

“We’re fighting for young people who didn’t have any say in their situation,” Johnson said. “They did what they were told and came here with their parents. They went to school. They have goals, and they are reaching out for them. We need to help.”

jennifer.delson@latimes.com