Immigration Reform: Wall Street Must Be Behind Dream Act For Passage

By Stephanie Robins on November 26, 2010, 7:42 am Posted in Finance News

The Dream Act seemingly has nothing to do with Wall Street. Those more discriminating in their research will immediately notice that it has everything to do with Wall Street. The Dream Act is a kind of amnesty bill that grants a road to citizenship for those children who grew up here and either served in the military or completed a college education. Those without college and worked hard seem to be left out. It looks like the higher education lobby has a hand in the Dream Act as well.

Wall Street

Assume the law passes and we have many people now legitimized. This adds people to the work force which brings down wages. This is good for shareholders. One does not need a degree in finance to figure this out. Therefore, Wall Street most definitely has a hand in the promulgation of a Dream Act.

All Are Guilty

Wall Street has stocks listed that are connected to Spanish language stations. NBC Universal especially is into Spanish language broadcasting. When you see hosts of these shows pushing the Dream Act it is for their benefit in propping up their stations. They want to maintain viewership at all costs. Everyone who pushes any law for that matter, does it out of self-interest.

The Dream Act might be acceptable in better times. Now that Wall Street is used to having companies “lean and mean,” the Dream Act serves their purposes. Their front people like the Chamber of Commerce is also on board in pushing the Dream Act.


The bottom line is whatever is good for Wall Street will become a reality. Congress obviously will not pass this act quickly or feel the wrath of the people. Somehow the Dream Act will be passed in one form or another or by Executive Order sometime in the future.

15 Responses to “Immigration Reform: Wall Street Must Be Behind Dream Act For Passage”

  1. Facts says:

    Ignorance is Bliss: Those who have NO CLUE or QUALIFICATIONS about Immigration are those who show their IGNORANCE :)

    There is NO SUCH WORD AS ‘ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT” in Blacks Law Dictionary, or In Merriam Websters Dictionary. Get Educated .

    “Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said Wednesday that the claim by some conservative activists that illegal immigration is to blame for all of the state’s fiscal problems is ignorant and bigoted.”

    Arturo E. Ocampo of Tracy has been a practicing attorney since 1985, In the 20-plus years I have spent studying, lecturing and litigating immigration issues, two things have always amazed me. The first is the amount and intensity of hate spewed against undocumented workers. The second is the amount of misinformation that is published about them.

    On this second point, the quote from Mark Twain is illustrative. “A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes.” I suppose this may be true in part because misinformation, like a lie, requires no accuracy, validation or research; all of which are time-consuming practices.

    The recent letters alleging that all undocumented workers are “criminals,” and specifically Veronica Suarez, whose plight was written about in the Tracy Press recently, is a criminal are factually incorrect.

    According to the facts (as stated in Sharon Franceschi’s Sept. 7 commentary) Saurez entered the U.S. on a valid visa, overstayed her visa when it expired, resulting in her unlawful immigration status. None of these acts, as stated by Franceschi, constitute a crime under federal or state law. Overstaying a valid visa under the Immigration and Naturalization Act is a civil violation of the law, not a criminal violation. Being in the U.S. in under undocumented status is not a criminal violation, but a civil violation of the INA.

    The facts, as stated by Franceschi, do not indicate that Suarez has committed any crime. To call her a criminal is erroneous at best, and libelous at worst.

    Furthermore, it is an Americanism that a person is innocent until proven guilty. So until Suarez (or any other undocumented person) is charged and found guilty of a crime, it would be inappropriate to call them “criminals.”

    It is important to note that there is a very large difference between civil and criminal violations of law. The distinction is so important that the law makes the erroneous allegation that one has committed a crime of slander or libel, (which means liability is automatic even without proof of damages). One who violates the civil law is no more a criminal than someone who has breached a contract or accidentally damaged another’s property.

    It is true that entering the United States without inspection is a misdemeanor under the INA. The misdemeanor is completed once an individual’s entry is complete. Suarez, according to Franceschi, did not enter without inspection; she entered with a valid visa. According to U.S. Immigration and Citizenship Services statistics, about 40 percent of undocumented persons enter legally and overstay their visas (which, as stated above, is not a crime). Consequently, at least 40 percent of the undocumented population has committed no crime in regards to their immigration status.

    Therefore, one cannot assume that a person has committed a crime simply because they are undocumented.

    Franceschi is also in error in her allegation that getting married and having children while being undocumented in the U.S. is a violation of the law. It is not. Franceschi goes on to say that Suarez “apparently bought a house illegally.” It is unlikely that Franceschi knows exactly how Suarez purchased her home. Consequently, any allegation of illegality is, at a minimum, irresponsible.

    It is also important to note that the Immigration and Citizenship Services doesn’t consider all undocumented persons criminals. When the Immigration and Citizenship Services publishes information about its enforcement activities involving undocumented workers, it are always sure to make a distinction between “criminal” and noncriminal aliens.

    Another myth is that the term “illegal aliens” is a term of art or is legal jargon. This term is not found anywhere in the INA or in Blacks Law Dictionary. The INA refers to undocumented persons as either an EWI (entered without inspection) or as someone who has overstayed their visa. “Illegal aliens” is a term invented by anti-immigrant groups designed to put undocumented persons in the worst possible light and to instill fear in Americans. It is intentionally designed to associate undocumented persons with criminality.

    This xenophobic view that undocumented persons are “simply criminals” comes from the historical stereotype that the foreign-born, especially undocumented immigrants, are responsible for higher crime rates. This misconception has deep roots in American public opinion and popular myth. This myth, however, is not supported empirically and has repeatedly been refuted by scientific studies. Both contemporary and historical data, (including U.S. governmental studies) have shown that immigration is associated with lower crime rates.

    The studies have uniformly shown that recent immigrants (including the undocumented) are less likely to be involved in violent crime, and that when there is an increase in immigration patterns, violent crime decreases. This has been shown to be true in large cities with heavy immigrant populations.

    In the most recent of these studies, The Myth of Immigrant Criminality and the Paradox of Assimilation (2007), from the Immigrant Policy Institute, it was found that among men age 18 to 39 (who are the vast majority of inmates in federal and state prisons and local jails), immigrants were five times less likely to be incarcerated than the native-born in 2000.

    During the Proposition 187 debate, then-Gov. Pete Wilson published statistics that stated that
    12 percent to 15 percent of the state prison population had Immigration and Citizenship Services holds or potential holds. The Department of Corrections analyst who compiled these numbers said Immigration and Citizenship Services holds are placed on inmates who were born outside of the U.S. (therefore 12 percent to 15 percent of the prison population was immigrants). The immigrant population at the time in California hovered at about 25 percent, showing immigrants were much less likely to be incarcerated than the native born in California.

    In short, the data shows you are much safer if your neighbor is an immigrant.

    Franceschi owes Suarez an apology. I am also surprised that the Tracy Press allowed a commentary to run without checking the facts. Although commentaries are designed to allow for the expression of differing opinions, the First Amendment is not as generous with misstatements of facts — especially when the facts can be libelous.

    For the immigration debate to be a healthy one, we should strive for a debate based on facts, not myth or tired stereotypes. We should also not let our position on this topic strip us of one of the great qualities we possess as people — the ability to be compassionate.

    Arturo E. Ocampo of Tracy has been a practicing attorney since 1985, with an expertise in immigration rights and class action lawsuits on behalf of immigrants, including the way the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 was implemented, Border Patrol’s raids and Proposition 187. He is director of diversity and equal employment opportunity for the San Jose/Evergreen Community College District.

  2. fdgfdgfgd says:

    fuck this article Stephanie Robins you slutty whore

  3. seshank says:

    I think this is hands down the worst piece on Immigration reform written in the last 5 years. The author of this piece should not be in the newspaper industry- not even in the zipcode of it.

  4. Christian in Austin says:


  5. Vickie says:

    It is an assault and further abuse on the American public to pass the Dream Act. It is a remedy for the millions of illegals who didn’t sneak across the border before their water broke. We really don’t have the $100 Billion they cost now much less spend more on them.

  6. Max9010 says:

    Nearly 360 million houshold defizit. How easy it woulde to get it back. Immigration reform get us 1.5 Trillion over 10 years.

  7. Vickie says:

    Note to the epistle writer, “Facts,”: Illegal immigrant would not be in the dictionary. They are two separate words. Look up illegal and then look up immigrant and put them together. No wonder defenders of the invasion don’t understand the issues.

  8. Emma says:

    The DREAM Act should be blocked because it leaves more than ten million undocumented immigrants behind and immigration reform would be off the table for years to come.
    The defeatist obama has so far not been willing to expend any political capital on comprehensive immigration reform, he is only interested in getting the Latino vote so that he can focus on issues that he really cares about. The DREAM Act must be stopped.

  9. Mary says:

    I am in support of the DREAM Act! I believe that it would provide these students an oppotunity to succeed in life. No person shall be discriminated against or be deprived of access to education. In 1975, the state of Texas passed a law known as the Alien Children Education (ACE). The state refused to invest state funds in the education of children who could not prove legal status in the United States. Beyond that, this law also forbade any illegal child the enrollment into any public school in the state of Texas. However, in 1982 in the case Pyler v. Doe, the Supreme Court ruled that this law violates the Fourteenth amendment of the United States Constitution. In addition, the Court found that by denying these children access to access to education, it would contribute to “the creation and perpetuation of a subclass of illiterates within our boundaries, surely adding to the problems and costs of unemployment, welfare, and crime.” (Wikipedia). These students are virtually denied access to higher education after graduating from high school. The High tuition costs undocumented students have to pay to enter college or university makes it impossible for them to obtain a better quality of life. If the DREAm Act is not approved, the economic impact will be worse in the future compared to what some opposers argue that the country will invest by helping these students!

  10. Sebastian says:

    Who ever said that Wall street making money is a bad thing anyway? This article is retarded. Wall street is what makes this country so powerful.

  11. seth says:

    Myth: The DREAM Act uses taxpayer dollars for scholarships and grants to undocumented students.

    Fact: The DREAM Act states that undocumented youth adjusting to lawful permanent resident status are only eligible for federal student loans (which must be paid back), and federal work-study programs, where they must work for any benefit they receive. They are not eligible for federal grants, such as Pell Grants.

    Myth: The DREAM Act allows undocumented students to pay cheaper tuition than citizens.

    Fact: The DREAM Act gives states the option to offer in-state tuition to students registered under DREAM, but it does NOT guarantee cheaper tuition. At most, the DREAM Act allows undocumented students to access the same benefits as their peers. The DREAM Act allows undocumented students to access in-state tuition, but only if they would otherwise qualify for such tuition, and if state law permits undocumented students to receive in-state tuition.

    Myth: The DREAM Act gives undocumented students and their families access to public benefits.

    Fact: DREAM Act students receive no special benefits and are subject to the same public benefits eligibility requirements as other legal immigrants. This means that DREAM Act students and families are NOT immediately eligible for Supplemental Security Income, food stamps, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Medicaid (other than emergency care), and numerous other federal benefit programs. In general, a person must be here as a lawful permanent resident for five years before they receive non-emergency federal assistance.

    Myth: The DREAM Act will result in a mass amnesty.

    Fact: The DREAM Act is not an amnesty. No one will automatically receive a green card. To legalize, individuals have to meet stringent eligibility criteria: they must have entered the United States before age 16; must have been here for five years or more; must not have committed any major crimes; must graduate from high school or the equivalent; and must complete at least two years of college or military service. Eligible students must first obtain conditional residency and complete the requirements before they can obtain a green card—a process that will take years. Not all immigrants who came as young children will be eligible to legalize because they will not meet some of these requirements.

    Myth: The DREAM Act will spur more illegal immigration because it rewards undocumented youth.

    Fact: Programs like the DREAM Act, which have clear cut-off dates, offer no incentives for more illegal immigration. In order to qualify for the DREAM Act, a student must have entered the United States before the age of 16 and have lived in the U.S. for at least five years before the date of enactment. Economic conditions have far more impact on illegal immigration than specific pieces of legislation.

    Myth: The DREAM Act isn’t just for students, but will benefit people of all ages.

    Fact: Because the U.S. has failed to address the question of illegal immigration for more than a decade, an entire generation of young people’s skills and contributions could easily be lost. The young people who inspired the DREAM Act ten years ago may now be in their early 30s and should be eligible to benefit when it becomes law. Consequently, the DREAM Act encourages immigrants 35 or younger to attend college or join the military, but they must still have entered the U.S. before they were 16 AND have been here for five years immediately preceding the date of enactment.

    Myth: The DREAM Act legalizes criminals and gang members and lets people who have already been ordered deported avoid the law.

    Fact: Immigrants convicted of serious crimes are ineligible for DREAM Act status; the DREAM Act excludes from eligibility most immigrants applying for benefits who have been under an order of deportation. Specifically, the DREAM Act states that an applicant may not have already been ordered deported unless they received the order before they were 16 years old.

    Myth: The DREAM Act lets students cut in line in front of other lawful immigrants.

    Fact: DREAM Act students do not compete for visas with other applicants for legal permanent residence. Instead, DREAM Act creates a separate program for students that requires them to earn legal permanent residence by attending college or serving in the military for two years while in a temporary legal status. DREAM will not affect the number of visas available or the time it takes to get a visa for those entering through traditional legal immigration.

    Myth: The DREAM Act would diminish opportunities for U.S.-citizen students.

    Fact: According to the National Immigration Law Center:

    Most undocumented students are likely to have zero impact on admission rates of native born students: Since 2001, 10 states have made it easier for undocumented state residents to attend college by offering in-state tuition to those that qualify. A significant portion of the students that took advantage of this opportunity have done so in community colleges, which have open enrollment. The small numbers of students who will attend 4-year universities are not significant enough to affect the opportunities of others.

    Institutions charged with education of our youth overwhelmingly support the bill. Well-established education organizations like the American Association of Community Colleges, American Association of State Colleges and Universities, National Educators Association, the College Board, and prominent university presidents/chancellors support the DREAM Act.

  12. Sharon Liu says:

    I love how the last poster says “Institutions charged with education of our youth overwhelmingly support the bill. Well-established education organizations yada yada.”

    The same organizations all loudly support affirmative-action preferences for Latinos. So not only do they want the children of illegals to get to stay–they also want children of illegals to go to the had of the line for college admission!

    Bottom line: Who gives a f- what they think? They are just morons who pander to campus radicals.

  13. Prue says:

    Never seen a btteer post! ICOCBW

  14. Kaden says:

    I thank you humbly for sharnig your wisdom JJWY

  15. hottiedl says:

    get the free porno here ( 2011 xxx porno’s ) //]click here to download the porn movie

Leave a Reply