On bipartisan vote, legislators save Dream Act

In a hearing room packed with Dream Act supporters, the Minnesota House Ways and Means Committee approved an omnibus education bill including the measure that would provide more educational opportunities for immigrants.

The Higher Education Omnibus bill passed on a bipartisan, 26-8 vote, despite a threat by Governor Tim Pawlenty to veto the legislation if the Dream Act provisions were included.

Votes on the omnibus bill may take place in the Senate on Thursday and in the House on Friday. The Minnesota Immigrant Freedom Network said it will continue to mobilize people to call legislators and go to the Capitol.

“Your continued support and advocacy on this issue is still very much needed; your voices have proven to fuel the engine of this movement!” said Alondra Espejel, communications organizer for the network. “There is still a chance that an amendment could be introduced on the House floor, and as we learned last year we’re not safe until the governor signs the bill.”

The Dream Act would allow young people who have lived in Minnesota and attended Minnesota high schools to pay in-state tuition at state universities and colleges, even though they are not citizens. Currently, many of these young people ? who often come to the state as part of immigrant families ? are priced out of higher education, proponents said.

The Dream Act could be implemented at no cost to the state, members of the Immigrant Freedom Network said. “Instead, if the bill passes, greater revenues for the state would be created in the form of a more professionalized workforce and a higher tax base.”

On Tuesday, Pawlenty sent a letter to legislators urging them to remove the Dream Act from the omnibus bill. ?Providing in-state tuition for illegal immigrants would give them benefits not available to legal U.S. citizens who reside in most other states,” he said. “In other words, an Iowa high school graduate would not be eligible for in-state Minnesota tuition, but a non-U.S. citizen, who is here illegally, would be.”

Comments are closed.