Regarding Sunday’s Tribune editorial (“Keep DREAM Act alive”): While I have empathy for illegal minors brought here by illegal means, I have much less tolerance for those same “minors” who turn 18 and yet seem willing to cheat their way into a four-year scholarship to which they are not entitled. How is this any different to an 18-year-old committing a felony and expecting no charges from it, because their parents brought them into the USA illegally as a kid? If this is not amnesty, then please tell me what is?
My son came here too as an 8-year-old and graduated from high school with honors plus he received a presidential scholarship. But we cannot even get the local community colleges to accept him as an Arizona resident for tuition purposes. We have to pay three times the in-state fees, despite living here for three years and in California for seven.
So don’t lecture me about fairness of the DREAM Act until this government fixes legal immigration and provides an act to protect legal minors, whose parents have followed all the rules, paid state and federal taxes for several years and came to the USA legally. That is NOT cutting off your nose to spite your face either. It’s the basis of immigration policy and the foundation of the United States of America.
John H. Carroll, Chandler
—
Letters policy: Click here to submit a letter. Please be brief (no more than 300 words) and type or print name, address, city and phone number for verification. Comments may be edited for clarity and length.
Accuracy posted at 2:28 pm on Sun, Dec 19, 2010.
"Forget DREAM Act"..............
In a 55-41 vote, the U.S. Senate voted down the House of Representatives version of the DREAM Act (H.R.5281) Saturday.
Sixty Senators were required to end debate on the bill, and in the end, amnesty supporters came up five short.
Dale Whiting posted at 10:23 pm on Wed, Dec 15, 2010.
John, explain yourself! What do you mean by saying "“minors” who turn 18 and yet seem willing to cheat their way into a four-year scholarship to which they are not entitled." How is that cheating?
And what do you mean by saying "My son came here too as an 8-year-old and graduated from high school with honors plus he received a presidential scholarship. But we cannot even get the local community colleges to accept him as an Arizona resident for tuition purposes." Sounds like you are not able to prove your residency. Want to give us the "rest of the story?" This story of your just does not add up.
VivaSB1070 posted at 6:48 pm on Wed, Dec 15, 2010.
I am certain that all of those bright, educated ( at the US taxpayer's expense ) illegal aliens are sorely needed in their country of birth. Adios.
EmperorSmith posted at 5:38 pm on Wed, Dec 15, 2010.
The time is coming
Poorman posted at 1:07 pm on Wed, Dec 15, 2010.
Illegals will always be able to work,afterall they do all the jobs we gringos won't do,Right?.
Accuracy posted at 9:25 am on Wed, Dec 15, 2010.
Supporters argue that the Federal DREAM Act would provide a future for young people who otherwise wouldn't be able to work or go to school. For illegal immigrants children who have gone through our public school systems, want to work and go to college.
While opponents of the controversial DREAM Act argue that the legislation gives an unfair advantage to illegal immigrants . . . but not to legal immigrants and not for U.S. citizens. That’s why the DREAM Act would cost taxpayers a good $6 billion a year, and the children of illegal immigrants could take up slots at some colleges that would have gone to American-born students.
The U.S. Senate delayed voting on the DREAM Act and, with only a couple of weeks left in the lame-duck Congress session, there’s limited chance of it passing with the new House of Representatives in January.
abimopectore posted at 5:20 am on Wed, Dec 15, 2010.
"My son came here too as an 8-year-old and graduated from high school with honors plus he received a presidential scholarship. But we cannot even get the local community colleges to accept him as an Arizona resident for tuition purposes. We have to pay three times the in-state fees, despite living here for three years and in California for seven."
Something doesn't sound right about what you're saying. If you can't establish residency with what you've just said, there is something you're not telling us.