Ask the Expert: Dan Griswold on the DREAM Act

Ryan Troyer, a sophomore from Goshen College (Indiana), asked:

"Could you analyze the DREAM (Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors) Act? There is a petition in favor of it circulating on my campus. Is it good or bad?"

Dan Griswold, Director of the Center for Trade Policy Studies at the Cato Institute, answers:

The DREAM ACT: Improving a Flawed System?

The DREAM Act is a bill proposed in Congress that would grant legal status to recent high school graduates who entered the country illegally as minors along with their parents. Introduced in both the House and the Senate in 2009, the Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors Act would grant permanent legal status to undocumented students who entered the United States at least five years before passage of the act and were under the age of 16 when they entered.

As introduced in the current Congress, the bill would require that the students have earned a high school diploma or equivalent, or be enrolled in an accredited institution of higher learning. The student must be a person of "good moral character" and not be barred from admission under other provisions of immigration law. Legalizing such students would generally make them eligible for in-state tuition and certain other government educational aid. They would also be eligible for citizenship after six years.

Supporters of the act argue that these students should not be punished for the actions of their parents. Granting them legal status would allow them to further their education and to assume more productive roles in our economy and society. Some opponents argue that act would reward the law-breaking of their parents and drive up educational costs.

Ideally, there would be no reason to propose the DREAM Act if there were more opportunities for legal immigration and if the government were far less involved in providing higher education. Far fewer minor children would enter the country illegally if more work visas were provided for their parents to enter the country legally. In-state tuition and government aid would cease to be a major issue if responsibility for providing higher education shifted more to a competitive private sector.

Given our current system, however, the DREAM Act would somewhat improve a bad situation. It would extend legal status to a group of people who have completed high school, typically speak English well, and are thus able to pursue higher education or better support themselves in the labor market. It would help to maintain a healthy growth rate of the U.S. labor force and provide entrepreneurial spirit associated with immigrants.

The DREAM Act would also extend more equitable treatment to students whose lack of legal status is no fault of their own. Their parents, although undocumented, have usually paid the same sales and property taxes paid by legal residents with similar incomes. The DREAM Act would lift thousands of students out of a legal netherworld and allow them to improve themselves while at the same time contribute to a more productive United States.