Implementation and Analysis the Dream Act - Article Example

Implementation and Analysis of the DREAM Act of Implementation and Analysis of the DREAM Act The Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act, is a bipartisan legislation that has been introduced in every congress since 2001. It seeks to provide a path to legalization for eligible unauthorized youth and young adults. The DREAM Act would extend conditional legal status to youth; who entered the United States before the age of 16, have been in the US for five years prior to the legislation enactment, have attained a diploma or equivalent and should be below 35 years of age.

The policy does not offer permanent nationality, but it allows eligible unauthorized persons to apply for a two year work permit that is renewable if they have no legal issues (The DREAM Act, 2012).The DREAM act has been widely debated upon immigration policy, being either the subject of discussion or action. This policy was independently administered by the department of Homeland security. The DHS secretary, Janet Napolitano released a memorandum ordering DHS to defer the deportation process temporarily, for individuals described by the DREAM Act.

The new policy is to be implemented through a department of Homeland Security directive ‘deferred action’ that lets the administration bypass congress. The implementation of this policy is thus utterly constitutional. The Congress has not only rejected the act once, but twice. This issue raises the question regarding how Americans feel about the Act (Batalova & McHugh, 2005). People affected by the act are the immigrants that do not meet all the qualifications for instance, those who do not meet the act’s education requirement.

The combination of poor English skills and lack of high school diploma would be a barrier to those seeking to pursue the legal status through the military. Study shows that almost a third of the unauthorized children live below 100 percent of the federal poverty level. This reflects the hardships in paying tuition fees, transport, and other expenses. This diminishes the possibility of achieving the education level as required by the dream act (Batalova & McHugh, 2005).Some states will be affected more than others by the implementation of DREAM Act.

This is due to the population sizes of potential beneficiaries. Access to education for the act’s beneficiaries would also vary from state to state due to the difference in education policies. Implementation of this policy would allow the DREAM Act to achieve its goals; to establish a path to citizenship for immigrants who were brought in the US by their parents as children. The act will contribute to the military efforts if enacted as the opportunity is presented for the immigrants. According to Pressman and Wildavsk (2005), implementation should increase the possibility that policy promises will be achieved.

This is what the Immigration department has done which shows that the policy is achievable.The US economy is likely to benefit from this act as this population pursue higher education or serve in the army. The security department will also be able to concentrate on the illegal immigrants who are a threat to the United States. From the analysis by the immigration Policy Institute, it is clears that only 38% of the total beneficiaries will successfully complete the DREAM act’s rigorous process to earn a permanent immigration status.

(The DREAM Act, 2012).If the beneficiaries satisfy all the requirements in the act, they would be able to petition for entry of their parents or siblings, but they would still be subjected to the same annual waiting period. This would take many years for parents or sibling who previously entered the country illegally to obtain a green card (Batalova & McHugh, 2005).In conclusion, the act is promising for the nation. The DREAM Act t would provide an unprecedented opportunity for unauthorized young people to gain permanent residence.

However, there are a number of challenges in achieving and implementing this act. ReferencesBatalova J. McHugh M. (2010). DREAM vs. Reality. An analysis of potential DREAM act beneficiaries. Migration Policy InstitutePressman, J.L. & Wildavsk. A. (2005). Implementation. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.The Dream Act. http://www.whitehouse.gov.