Theftz22
Smash Lord
I took my 3 main arguments against the DREAM Act from a recent essay and made it into a topic. Yes it's a wall of text. Get over it. I'll throw in some color to spice it up. Look up the act if you don't know what it is, not gonna bother explaining it.
One of the prerequisites for being eligible for the DREAM Act is that applicants must “have lived in the country for at least 5 consecutive years prior to the bills enactment”. This effectively means that the DREAM Act only applies to the children of illegal immigrants currently living in the US. Therefore, the bill proposes nothing in relation to future children of illegal immigrants who sneak into the nation after the passing of the bill. Not only does this reveal the ultimate insufficiency of the DREAM Act, but it also presents a clear dichotomy that proponents must answer for. Surely the proponents of the bill do not wish to allow future illegal children to continue to live in the country undocumented. This option presents not only the obvious problems of illegal immigrants, but also calls into question why the bill was then necessary to begin with if it is maintained that illegal immigrants can continue living in the country undocumented. So this brings the proponent to two clear options when it comes to dealing with future children brought illegally to the country: amnesty or deportation. If the advocate of the DREAM Act supports amnesty for these potential illegal children, then they are supporting an option that will lead to an influx of harmful illegal immigrants. This is because parents who sneak into the US are rewarded by having their children granted citizenship, effectively encouraging illegal immigration and acting as a magnet for the perpetuation of the problem. It would also mean that it would be necessary to pass further legislation because the DREAM Act would not suffice. If, on the other hand, the supporter of the DREAM Act advocates deporting future immigrants, the question quickly becomes why exactly was arbitrary group of illegal immigrants granted citizenship, and yet citizenship will be denied to all other illegal minors. It would seem to be contrary to the entire view of the proponents of the DREAM Act to want to deport future children of illegal immigrants when they campaign so hard for amnesty. This option is hypocritical in that it supports the same plan of deportation that it criticizes. Not only is the DREAM Act insufficient in dealing with the problem of illegal immigration, but it also presents a clear dichotomy of future options which are problematic or contrary to the goal of the DREAM Act.
Furthermore, the DREAM Act is more than insufficient in dealing with illegal immigration, it is also harmful to the American economy. This is because in our modern overpopulated world, population increase is not a good thing for an economy. With an unemployment rate hovering at about 9 percent (Employment Situation Summary), the US has no labor shortage. It is clear that the US economy is failing to generate the jobs needed to sustain its current population, let alone a larger population of citizens that would be produced by the DREAM Act. It would be terribly harmful for the current unemployed Americans to face an increased pool of competition for the already limited job opportunities. The welfare of children whose parents are unemployed is at risk if parents cannot find a job to support the family. Adding more competing citizens into the mix only worsens the problem. Another problem of increasing the labor supply is that it enables businesses to lower the pay rate for jobs. By increasing citizens, and thus potential job applicants, the DREAM Act increases demand for jobs. This means that more Americans would be forced to take jobs at lower income rates in order to insure employment. This gives companies leverage to decrease the pay rate, harming the American worker. This is a particularly frightening prospect for the average working class American who can hardly afford to live on their current income. Furthermore, immigrants have a tendency to ship money back to family in their native country, known as remittances. This would be especially prevalent if the DREAM Act were passed because the parents of the illegal minors would not attain citizenship, putting them at a high risk for deportation back to their native country. Because they send money out of the US and out of US circulation, these remittances lower GDP, thus harming the American economy (Bowman). It is estimated that remittances cost the US around $18 billion per year (Bowman.) Moreover, these new citizens would be competing with natural born Americans for spots in colleges. Because these immigrants will be mainly minority groups, they have the added advantage of affirmative action, giving them pre-determined favoritism over a natural born American. This conclusively means fewer students will get into the college of their choosing and achieve financial success. The increase of citizens spawned by the DREAM Act will negatively impact the US economy.
Finally, if passed, the DREAM Act will increase the number of immigrants to the US in the future and delay the removal of extraneous illegal immigrants currently residing in the US. One little known aspect of the bill is that it allows the children who become citizens to sponsor family members for citizenship at the age of 21 (King). This translates to further increases in population via more citizens coming in from abroad. This increase in population is detrimental to our economy precisely because of the reasons previously given in the previous paragraph. On top of that, no one who applies for citizenship under the DREAM Act can be deported until they can be proven to be illegible by a court (King). Not only will this be costly and overload the already clogged up court system, but it will also result in thousands of fake applications to act as a visa to stay in the US until proven bogus. This results firstly in an increase of population, but even worse, thousands of undocumented aliens inhabiting the country. This is a problem because these unlawful aliens are free to use hospitals and school services, costing American taxpayers while not contributing any taxes of their own (Bowman). And because illegal immigrants cannot purchase insurance, any accidents they are liable for on the road will ultimately end up being covered by law-abiding Americans and insurance companies. The resulting increase in immigration and forestalling of the removal of illegal immigrants from the country is further reason to oppose passing the DREAM Act.
One of the prerequisites for being eligible for the DREAM Act is that applicants must “have lived in the country for at least 5 consecutive years prior to the bills enactment”. This effectively means that the DREAM Act only applies to the children of illegal immigrants currently living in the US. Therefore, the bill proposes nothing in relation to future children of illegal immigrants who sneak into the nation after the passing of the bill. Not only does this reveal the ultimate insufficiency of the DREAM Act, but it also presents a clear dichotomy that proponents must answer for. Surely the proponents of the bill do not wish to allow future illegal children to continue to live in the country undocumented. This option presents not only the obvious problems of illegal immigrants, but also calls into question why the bill was then necessary to begin with if it is maintained that illegal immigrants can continue living in the country undocumented. So this brings the proponent to two clear options when it comes to dealing with future children brought illegally to the country: amnesty or deportation. If the advocate of the DREAM Act supports amnesty for these potential illegal children, then they are supporting an option that will lead to an influx of harmful illegal immigrants. This is because parents who sneak into the US are rewarded by having their children granted citizenship, effectively encouraging illegal immigration and acting as a magnet for the perpetuation of the problem. It would also mean that it would be necessary to pass further legislation because the DREAM Act would not suffice. If, on the other hand, the supporter of the DREAM Act advocates deporting future immigrants, the question quickly becomes why exactly was arbitrary group of illegal immigrants granted citizenship, and yet citizenship will be denied to all other illegal minors. It would seem to be contrary to the entire view of the proponents of the DREAM Act to want to deport future children of illegal immigrants when they campaign so hard for amnesty. This option is hypocritical in that it supports the same plan of deportation that it criticizes. Not only is the DREAM Act insufficient in dealing with the problem of illegal immigration, but it also presents a clear dichotomy of future options which are problematic or contrary to the goal of the DREAM Act.
Furthermore, the DREAM Act is more than insufficient in dealing with illegal immigration, it is also harmful to the American economy. This is because in our modern overpopulated world, population increase is not a good thing for an economy. With an unemployment rate hovering at about 9 percent (Employment Situation Summary), the US has no labor shortage. It is clear that the US economy is failing to generate the jobs needed to sustain its current population, let alone a larger population of citizens that would be produced by the DREAM Act. It would be terribly harmful for the current unemployed Americans to face an increased pool of competition for the already limited job opportunities. The welfare of children whose parents are unemployed is at risk if parents cannot find a job to support the family. Adding more competing citizens into the mix only worsens the problem. Another problem of increasing the labor supply is that it enables businesses to lower the pay rate for jobs. By increasing citizens, and thus potential job applicants, the DREAM Act increases demand for jobs. This means that more Americans would be forced to take jobs at lower income rates in order to insure employment. This gives companies leverage to decrease the pay rate, harming the American worker. This is a particularly frightening prospect for the average working class American who can hardly afford to live on their current income. Furthermore, immigrants have a tendency to ship money back to family in their native country, known as remittances. This would be especially prevalent if the DREAM Act were passed because the parents of the illegal minors would not attain citizenship, putting them at a high risk for deportation back to their native country. Because they send money out of the US and out of US circulation, these remittances lower GDP, thus harming the American economy (Bowman). It is estimated that remittances cost the US around $18 billion per year (Bowman.) Moreover, these new citizens would be competing with natural born Americans for spots in colleges. Because these immigrants will be mainly minority groups, they have the added advantage of affirmative action, giving them pre-determined favoritism over a natural born American. This conclusively means fewer students will get into the college of their choosing and achieve financial success. The increase of citizens spawned by the DREAM Act will negatively impact the US economy.
Finally, if passed, the DREAM Act will increase the number of immigrants to the US in the future and delay the removal of extraneous illegal immigrants currently residing in the US. One little known aspect of the bill is that it allows the children who become citizens to sponsor family members for citizenship at the age of 21 (King). This translates to further increases in population via more citizens coming in from abroad. This increase in population is detrimental to our economy precisely because of the reasons previously given in the previous paragraph. On top of that, no one who applies for citizenship under the DREAM Act can be deported until they can be proven to be illegible by a court (King). Not only will this be costly and overload the already clogged up court system, but it will also result in thousands of fake applications to act as a visa to stay in the US until proven bogus. This results firstly in an increase of population, but even worse, thousands of undocumented aliens inhabiting the country. This is a problem because these unlawful aliens are free to use hospitals and school services, costing American taxpayers while not contributing any taxes of their own (Bowman). And because illegal immigrants cannot purchase insurance, any accidents they are liable for on the road will ultimately end up being covered by law-abiding Americans and insurance companies. The resulting increase in immigration and forestalling of the removal of illegal immigrants from the country is further reason to oppose passing the DREAM Act.
