California Conservatives Seeking to Punish Children Brought to the United States Illegally by Their Parents

Can’t Be Rewarding Those 3 Year Olds Who Committed Criminal Acts Can We?

Decency, Morality and Compassion Test: 

Question 17:

Let’s all assume the following situation:

A person is born in a foreign country, and at an early age is brought to California illegally by one or both parents.  The person is enrolled in public schools, graduates and has lead a perfectly normal life.  The person does not belong to a gang, does not use drugs and has excelled academically.

The person is applying for legal immigration status, and needs financial help to attend college.  Providing this help to students of this type would cost 1% of the state’s student grant budget.  California has already invested hundreds of thousands of dollars in educating the student.

The State of California Should:

1. Incarcerate the person in a jail for a long period of time, since the student is a criminal

2. Send the person back to the country of origin with or without a period of prior incarceration

3. Allow the person to remain in this country, but have to wear a Scarlet “I” as an illegal immigrant.

4.  Deny the person any rights and condemn the person to a life of unemployment, homelessness, and dire poverty.

5. Treat the person the same as any other person raised in California

Ok, not that hard a question.  But if you are a Conservative in California you will have picked either A, B, C or D. (and contrary to test rules, probably picked them all). Conservatives in that state regard children who were brought to the U. S. as youngster as wanton criminals.  They are in a class of murderers, robbers, rapists and other violent felons, and the state should use its full police power to prosecute them.

Unfortunately for these Conservatives much of the rest of the state sees these young men and women for what they really are, decent, hard working people, the kind any society would like to have.  So California has passed its own “Dream Act” which provides for treatment of these people the same way that every other person who attended school in the state and graduated is treated.

To qualify for aid under the bill, students must graduate from a California high school after attending school in the state for at least three years and must affirm that they are in the process of applying to legalize their immigration status. They also must show financial need and meet academic standards.

The bill was introduced by Assemblyman Gil Cedillo (D-Los Angeles), who praised Brown for showing courage in signing it.

"After having invested 12 years in the high school education of these young men and women, who are here through no fault of their own," Cedillo said, "it's the smartest thing for us to do to permit these students to get scholarships and be treated like every other student."

This action of course infuriates Conservatives, whose war on children who take government money that could be used for tax cuts for the wealthy is unending.  So the Tea Party folks in that state are trying to get a ballot referendum that would repeal the law.

When the state Dream Act was signed into law in October, it was greeted with cheers by those who felt it would give undocumented youth a much needed opportunity to succeed. It has also inspired anger and dismay among many who believe that the state should not spend scarce resources on illegal immigrants.

"It's ironic they want to use education dollars for foreign nationals when they're raising tuitions for U.S. citizens," said volunteer Ernie Arnold of South Pasadena.

The argument against using education dollars for “foreign nationals” would be valid if that is what these students were.  But they are not.  They are Americans, whose only crime was to have been brought to this nation soon after they were born elsewhere.

Of all of the current Republican candidates, Mitt Romney, who flouts his clean and moral life style in contrast to people like Newt Gingrich, (who by comparison has not had a very clean and moral life style) stands out as the most vocal supporter of the anti-child issues like this.  This leads to the often asked question.

“Why don’t those who purport to support family values support policies that promote family values”?

Get back to us Mitt (and others) when you have an answer.