Letter to the Editor: DREAM act column makes many assumptions
Published: Tuesday, October 25, 2011
Updated: Wednesday, October 26, 2011 16:10
Apart from perpetuating negative stereotypes, there are many assumptions made in Alexandra Pittman's "DREAM Act is total nightmare for citizens," printed Oct. 17. One of the most egregious is that it's the fault of the DREAM Act for 2,500 California students not being able to receive aid, which is absolutely not the case.
The article reads: "a total of 2,500, only 1 percent, of accepted university students would now be qualified for aid in California, the costs of which total $14.5 million," when the actual statistic is that 2,500 additional students will now qualify for Cal-grants, only affecting 1 percent of the funding.
Pittman makes other inflammatory statements such as: "The government seems to now be advocating illegal immigration — you jump the border to our country, we'll pay for your college experience" and "don't advocate jumping the border with enticing prospects of a free education."
Why is she assuming that these immigrants have "jumped the border?"
Anyone at all knowledgeable about the immigration system in our country would
know that the majority of young people who are eligible for the DREAM Act grew up in the U.S., sat next to us in class, and are only being denied a chance of an education because of the decisions their parents made. Saying these students should be punished for something they had no control over is like saying children of convicted felons shouldn't be allowed to vote until their parents' rights are resorted. Does that make sense? No. Is that un-American? Yes.
What this author is missing is that what we should really be focusing on as a country is reforming our legal immigration system so that it is more fair and inclusive. However, we are instead focusing all of our energy on punishing young people for wanting to make their lives better.