The Senate should approve the DREAM Act now

It enjoys bipartisan
support, and is backed by leaders in education, the military, and business, as well as
by religious communities such as the Evangelical movement, the Jewish community and the United States Conference of Catholic
Bishops.

So, why is the measure controversial?   

For one, these young people are in the U.S. illegally,
and issues related to illegal immigration tend to generate more heat than
light. But let’s be clear: these kids came with their parents and can
hardly be held responsible for decisions made when they were still in diapers. They
then proceeded to grow up in America and do all that was asked of them – learn
English, finish high school with good grades, and aspire to great things. Do
we really want to pursue the alternative to the DREAM Act, which is to deport
these valedictorians and ROTC members to countries they don’t even remember?  
 

Evidently, some do. Sen. David Vitter (R-LA) took
to the Senate floor this week to strongly oppose the bill. He started up
the right-wing sound-bite machine, claiming that DREAM
was an “amnesty measure” that would “reward bad behavior.” But Vitter, who
knows something about bad behavior (and should know even more about glass
houses), has the DREAM Act all wrong. 

The bill details a rigorous process by which those
eligible have to meet stringent age, character, and educational and military
service requirements to earn legal status. This isn’t about amnesty, it’s
about accountability. The bill sets out a well-designed obstacle course
that will produce fine young citizens out of those who make it through. 

The second reason the Senate vote has become
controversial is that the DREAM Act will be considered as an amendment to the
defense bill. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) called the DREAM amendment “extraneous”
and said it has “nothing to do” with the military. Senator John McCain (R-AZ),
who up until this Congress was a longstanding co-sponsor of the DREAM Act, argued that DREAM
was “totally unrelated to national defense.”   

Wrong again. The FY2010-12 Strategic Plan for the
Department of Defense’s Office of the Undersecretary for Personnel and
Readiness recommends passage of the DREAM Act, in order to help the military “shape
and maintain a mission-ready All Volunteer Force.” According to Louis
Caldera, former Secretary of the Army, “The DREAM Act will materially expand
the pool of individuals qualified, ready and willing to serve their country in
uniform… I have no doubt many of these enlistees will be among the best
soldiers in our Army.“

According to Margaret Stock, (Ret.) Lieutenant Colonel
in the Military Police Corps, U.S.  Army Reserve, “Passage of the DREAM
Act would directly benefit American national defense by enlarging the pool of
highly qualified, US-educated ‘green card’ recruits for the US Armed Forces.” 

In fact, the DREAM Act has traditionally been a
bipartisan effort. Its lead sponsors in the Senate are Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL),
Sen. Richard Lugar (R-IN), and the House bill was authored by Rep. Howard
Berman (D-CA), Rep. Lucille Roybal-Allard (D-CA), and Rep. Lincoln Diaz-Balart
(R-FL).  In the 108^th Congress, the Senate Judiciary Committee
voted 16-3 in favor of the DREAM Act with support from current Republican Senators
Orrin Hatch (R-UT) (who helped draft the legislation), Chuck Grassley (R-IA),
Jon Kyl (R-AZ), and John Cornyn (R-TX). The DREAM Act was also included in
comprehensive immigration reform legislation in 2006, as an amendment from
Senator Graham in the Judiciary Committee, and ultimately 23 Republican
Senators voted for that bill.   

But this is Washington, and these days the pursuit of
power trumps common sense and good policy. Republicans in the Senate are
under continuing and intense pressure to block any and all progress on any and
all fronts. And so members who in the past have supported the DREAM Act
are road-testing excuses. It’s about procedures. It’s about timing. It’s
about the vehicle. It’s about politics. But what it really seems to
be about is getting to “no” for cynical political reasons. 

Okay, so let’s talk politics, and bluntly.
Republicans, this may be your last chance with Latino voters for some time. If
you can’t find a way to support this limited measure to help young immigrant
children attend college and serve in our military, most of whom are Latino, you
will be telling Latino immigrants to go to hell. You will make it nearly
impossible for your 2012 Presidential nominee to win the 40 percent of Latino
votes he or she will need to win back the White House. And you will accelerate
your “success” at turning socially conservative Latinos into lifelong
Democrats. 

Wouldn’t it be better to make the dreams of 800,000 young people come
true? 

Frank Sharry is the Executive Director of America’s Voice.