ILW.COM - the immigration portal Immigration Daily

Home Page


Immigration Daily

Archives

Processing times

Immigration forms

Discussion board

Resources

Blogs

Twitter feed

Immigrant Nation

Attorney2Attorney

CLE Workshops

Immigration books

Advertise on ILW

VIP Network

EB-5

移民日报

About ILW.COM

Connect to us

Make us Homepage

Questions/Comments


SUBSCRIBE

Immigration Daily


Chinese Immig. Daily




The leading
immigration law
publisher - over
50000 pages of
free information!
Copyright
1995-
ILW.COM,
American
Immigration LLC.

View RSS Feed

Greg Siskind on Immigration Law and Policy

NEW VERSION OF DREAM ACT INTRODUCED

Rating: 3 votes, 5.00 average.

Last night Senator Durbin introduced a new version of the DREAM Act with a number of changes presumably included to satisfy fence sitters who felt that the bill needed to be further restricted. I've summarized the latest version of the bill which you can find below. Feel free to email me (gsiskind@visalaw.com) if you catch things needing editing.


Note a couple of big changes - 


- eligibility age dropped from 35 to 30 years old


- expansion of grounds of ineligibility to include public charge and health grounds


- new civics and English testing requirement


- proof of payment of all back taxes


- elimination of repeal of in state tuition ban


- ten year conditional nonimmigrant status then three years of permanent residency before naturalization eligibility (as opposed to six years of conditional immigrant status followed by eligibility to naturalize)


There are a number of other changes as well, but these are the ones likely to grab headlines.


The Republicans are threatening to filibuster this bill as well as Don't Ask Don't Tell and an unemployment benefits extension if they don't get their way on extending the Bush tax cuts. So we will likely have to wait to see if that matter is resolved. 


Nevertheless, while the changes made are tough concessions, they hopefully indicate that more votes are on the way. For example, Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison indicated she was a no vote based on the previous version of the DREAM bill. Hopefully, these new changes will mean she's ready to vote yes. 


 












DREAM Act summary November 30 2010 version -

Submit "NEW VERSION OF DREAM ACT INTRODUCED" to Facebook Submit "NEW VERSION OF DREAM ACT INTRODUCED" to Twitter Submit "NEW VERSION OF DREAM ACT INTRODUCED" to Google Submit "NEW VERSION OF DREAM ACT INTRODUCED" to StumbleUpon Submit "NEW VERSION OF DREAM ACT INTRODUCED" to Reddit Submit "NEW VERSION OF DREAM ACT INTRODUCED" to Digg Submit "NEW VERSION OF DREAM ACT INTRODUCED" to del.icio.us

Tags: None Add / Edit Tags

Comments

  1. Another Voice's Avatar
    Greg,

    If DREAM passes the Senate would they have to reconcile with a House version and more changes are to come?
  2. USC's Avatar
    "If DREAM passes the Senate would they have to reconcile with a House version and more changes are to come?"

    More likely, Pelosi would pass the Senate version. The House recesses December 17, so not a lot of time.

  3. My 2 cents's Avatar
    I think the Republicans could compromise on this scenario. DREAM Act in exchange for making Bush era tax cuts permanent. What follows after that I leave to everyone's imagination
  4. Another Voice's Avatar
    NOT GOOD NEWS!!!

    Obama Rallying Support for Pact With Russia
    By PETER BAKER
    Published: December 1, 2010

    The tradeoff could be other Democratic initiatives, like repealing the ban on gay members of the military serving openly and creating a path to legal residency for some illegal immigrants who came to the United States as children. While the White House said all of these matters could still be addressed, some Democratic officials said they realized something might have to be sacrificed.
  5. Jim's Avatar
    "While the White House said all of these matters could still be addressed, some Democratic officials said they realized something might have to be sacrificed."

    If I were them, the sacrificial lamb should be giving in for extending the Bush tax cuts across the board. Then just follow the Debt Commission's proposals on reforming the tax system after the 2012 elections.

    Sacrificing the DREAM act is too precious as they need Hispanics to even have a chance in the 2012 elections.

    Pentagon already formally released their findings on the effects of repealing Don't ask Don't tell and it was positive as expected. Sec. Gates has asked for it as well. No sense not repealing DADT if there is no real hindrance to it other than homophobe Republicans.

    Just extend the Bush tax cuts!!
  6. Jim's Avatar
    "ten year conditional nonimmigrant status then three years of permanent residency before naturalization eligibility"

    People who got their GCs the traditional way are required 5 yrs permanent residency before naturalization eligibility.

    So for fairness, it should also be 5 yrs for DREAM Act beneficiaries but bring down the conditional non-immigrant status to 8 yrs instead of 10 yrs.. I think that is a win-win situation for both legal immigrants and the DREAM Act beneficiaries.
  7. Carmen's Avatar
    The cutoff date for filing provision is very confusing.

    If someone brings a new baby into the U.S. today and the bill passes tomorrow, can the baby file an application in 28 years 364 days from today when he grows up and gets a GED and enrolls into college?

    My sister who lives in mexico just had a baby and is asking.

    --------------------
    (4) DEADLINE FOR SUBMISSION OF APPLICATION.

    --An alien shall submit an application for cancellation of removal and conditional nonimmigrant status under this subsection no later than the date that is 1 year after the later of--

    (A) the date the alien was admitted to an institution of higher education in the United States;

    (B) the date the alien earned a high school diploma or obtained a general education deveopment certificate in the United States; or

    (C) the date of the enactment of this Act.
  8. Adi's Avatar
    "I think that is a win-win situation for both legal immigrants and the DREAM Act beneficiaries. "

    How are legals benefiting from this handout?
  9. Jim's Avatar
    @Adi,

    I was referring to the context that the new version DREAM Act is not being too unfair solely with regards to the years for them to become eligible for naturalization.

    So, let me re-paste my entire post:

    "People who got their GCs the traditional way are required 5 yrs permanent residency before naturalization eligibility.

    So for fairness, it should also be 5 yrs for DREAM Act beneficiaries but bring down the conditional non-immigrant status to 8 yrs instead of 10 yrs.. I think that is a win-win situation for both legal immigrants and the DREAM Act beneficiaries."

    Hope it is clear to you now.
  10. Legal and no longer waiting's Avatar
    The question is not of what's fair, but of what can be traded in negotiations. Military can get you naturalized in 6 months, no green card needed. Not fair? Who cares, they can, period.
  11. George Chell's Avatar
    On a related but different topic, did difficulties in getting visas for fans do the US word cup soccer bid in...just as it did to the US olympic bid a year ago?

    http://sports.yahoo.com/soccer/news?slug=ro-worldcupvote120210
  12. Jim's Avatar
    "The question is not of what's fair, but of what can be traded in negotiations. Military can get you naturalized in 6 months, no green card needed. Not fair? Who cares, they can, period."

    Why am I not surprised that you see no difference between someone who served in the military and someone who is illegal (eventhough not of their own fault) and being legalized.

    Why do you think the bill needs to be watered down and made more palatable? Just pure negotiations just for the sake of it?
  13. Jim's Avatar
    "On a related but different topic, did difficulties in getting visas for fans do the US word cup soccer bid in...just as it did to the US olympic bid a year ago?"

    I don't think the US will be able to host a major event in the foreseeable future because of visa issues. Also, were you surprised on the attitude and tone of the US author of the article you've posted? It's the same attitude and tone when US lost it's bid for the Olympics.

    Many people still don't get it.

    "However, it found that its guarantee of a hugely profitable tournament and a stadium and transportation infrastructure that is second to none wasn't enough"

    Of course it isn't!! And why not Australia if not the USA??
    Australia has the same problems as the US. Ask Indians if they have any idea on why not Australia either. I think they have a pretty good idea.
Put Free Immigration Law Headlines On Your Website

Immigration Daily: the news source for legal professionals. Free! Join 35000+ readers Enter your email address here: