With 2014 becoming a big year for immigration legislation, APU’s Pi Sigma Alpha, the political science national honor society, held the Immigration Reform Forum in LAPC on March 25, where four faculty members, a group of students and two activists came together to exchange ideas. The forum discussed old and recent legislation changes concerning immigration as well as their thoughts on the newest state version of the DREAM Act, which stands for Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors. On March 17, the DREAM Act was defeated in New York. Promotion of the act continues to spread throughout the states however, with 15 of the 50 states enacting a version.
Allison Thompson | Contributing Writer
The DREAM Act provides permanent conditional residency to immigrants of good moral character who graduated from U.S. high schools, came to the U.S. as minors and lived here for at least five years prior to the act’s enactment. Since the first introduction of the proposed bill in August 2001, there have been several versions that Congress and other political leaders have tried to pass. Different variations of the DREAM Act have been proposed in 2006, 2007, 2009, 2010, 2011 and 2012.
Previously , the last major legislative immigration change occurred in 1968, which granted amnesty for undocumented immigrants that had been in the U.S. for a while. It also placed limitations on employers so that immigrants were not underpaid or overworked. Most recently , the DREAM Act has dominated immigration conversation.
Dr. Bryan Lamkin, professor of history at APU, spoke first on the panel by providing background on immigra- tion legislation since the Civil War. He discussed how immigration has changed and been renewed numerous times, and how it affects the number of people who come to the U.S. to begin new lives.
“The DREAM Act attempts for younger people to have an education and serve in the military, ” Lamkin said.
Several members of We the People Rising, a grassroots volunteer network aiming to influence “institutions of political corruption” through activism, attended the forum. Robin Hvidston, the executive director , spoke on the panel and received cheers and “amens” from the member-filled au- dience.
“ There are activists in the audience, demonstrating that we are boots on the ground,” Hvidston said. “…we are people that show up, and this is an example.”
Hvidston provided statistics to prove her position that immigration laws should remain enforced and un- changed. She stated that more than 22 million Americans are unemployed and underemployed and could be given jobs that are currently held by immigrants, both legal and illegal. We The People Rising works through counter-rallies, phone calls and Internet social networking.
“ We are firm believers in humanity and we say to the world, ‘Stand up in your home country, do not come to the U.S. illegally,’” Hvidston said. “We are a great nation because we are a nation of laws.”
Li Kou, a member of We The People Rising, also spoke on the panel and told her story. She is an immigrant from Laos who moved to the U.S. with her family when she was young.
“ We grew up respecting this nation,” Kou said. “We are grateful we came to a place where there are laws, peace and order . ”
As a legal immigrant, Kou is against illegal immigrants who may not “respect the nation” the same way. Kou said she learned about America from veterans and senior citizens, and realized that “they built this country .”
“My great love comes from seeing how much older generations served in this nation; they never complained about what they had to do for this na- tion,” Kou said.
She began working with We The People Rising to combat the 2011 bill that would give college funding to illegal college-age immigrants. Kou thought it was unfair because children of veterans were still struggling to receive funding for college, yet the bill would provide tuition funds to illegal immigrants.
“A nation without borders is a not a sovereign land,” Kou said.
Dr . Don Thorsen, a professor of theology at APU, disclosed his view on the immigration discussion by relating it to what Jesus said about foreigners.
“I know ‘progressive’ is put after my name tonight, but I prefer to call myself ‘biblical, ’” Thorsen said.
Thorsen believes that the best policies about immigration can be found in the Bible. He provided verses about immigrants, including Leviticus 19:33-34 and Numbers 9:14. He also discussed advocacy based on Luke 4:17-19 and Matthew 25:44-46 and hospitality in Hebrews 13:2-3. He provided the audience with a copy of his essay titled “Immigration, Scripture and the Need for Reformation. ”
“When Christians welcome aliens/ foreigners/strangers, they believe they welcome Jesus, ” Thorsen wrote in his essay , explaining that immigrants should be welcomed into the country because Jesus encouraged hospitality and allowing others to come into homes and cities.
“There should be a rejection of policies that are hurtful toward people, families and toward important values as a Christian and as an American,” Thorsen said.
Dr. Daniel Palm, professor and chair of the Department of History and Political Science at APU, then spoke about the implications that birthrates and immigration will have on the country . He compared the U.S. to Germany, Canada and Mexico, which are similar to America in certain respects but maintain different immigration laws and restrictions.
Another professor of political science and the new dean of the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, Dr. Jennifer W alsh, presented information concerning Constitutional restrictions on immigration and other related political restrictions.
“Patriotism is a theme that runs through our immigration debates, and I think a lot of that comes from our American heritage,” Walsh said. “We have the opportunity to look at this as a political community.”
Walsh discussed the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, which addressed concerns about border security , issues about pathways to citizenship, whether minors could become citizens and how to prevent employers from hiring and taking advantage of illegal immigrant workers.
“Since that time, we’ve had ongoing conversations about its effectiveness,” Walsh said. “We do now spend more on border security, and its been increased even more after 9/11.”
An angry roar erupted from the audience when Walsh discussed the White House’ s stance on immigration. “President Obama campaigned with a forgiving immigration stance, but he has been more strict than the Bush administration,” Walsh said. She continued by saying that the current deportation rate is higher now than it was during the Bush administration, which is the opposite of what Obama supporters expected. Walsh also provided some background information and current updates on the Dream Act.
On June 15, 2012, President Obama said he would stop deporting young illegal immigrants who matched certain criteria under the proposed Dream Act. Then, in August 2012, a new program titled Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals began accept- ing applications of young immigrants who could receive deferred action concerning their legal status.
The New Y ork State Senate recently rejected the Dream Act, which would have allowed undocumented immigrants to receive state tuition aid. California, Texas, Washington and New Mexico currently extend student aid to undocumented students. However , only 15 states allow undocumented students to pay in-state tuition rates at universities, according to The Washington Post.
California contains the greatest number of potential DREAM Act beneficiaries: an estimated 500,000 students. California signed the first phase of the Dream Act into law on October 21, 2001, titled AB540, allowing undocumented students to receive in-state tuition. California later passed part one and part two of the Dream Act: part one, effective January 2012, enabled undocumented students to apply for privately-funded scholarships and part two, effective January 2012, allowed the same students to apply for the Board of Governor’ s Fee Waiver, institutional aid and Cal Grants.
A student asked the panel about whether the deportation of illegal immigrants or the continuation of the agricultural community should take precedence. Hvidston said that there are 22 million Americans looking for jobs, so the agricultural industry should look to employ American labor instead of “exploitive cheap labor . ”
After the panel speakers finished speaking, Walsh said that the forum was meant to focus on conversations between students and panel members. As a result, the activists in the audience had to wait to speak with the panelists. Walsh also men- tioned several times that it was “a discussion, not a debate,” trying to discourage the audience from debating legislation changes and political views.
This discussion opened up the topic of immigration and the Dream Act to APU students, faculty and local activists. The passage of various versions of the Act continues to spread throughout the state. Accordingly, immigration legislation will continue to be a hotly discussed conversation in the public discourse in the months and years to come.