skip to main content

Listen

Read

Watch

Schedules

Programs

Events

Give

Account

Donation Heart Ribbon

Campaign To Repeal California DREAM Act Begins

College students from throughout San Diego gather at a college campus to hold a rally for the state and federal DREAM Acts in 2010.
Enlarge this image

Above: College students from throughout San Diego gather at a college campus to hold a rally for the state and federal DREAM Acts in 2010.

— California Republican Assemblyman Tim Donnelly can begin his signature drive to overturn the DREAM Act, which was signed into law earlier this month by Gov. Jerry Brown.

Donnelly, a member of the Tea Party and founder of the Minuteman Party in California, has 74 days to collect signatures to put the DREAM Act up for a vote in November 2012. Donnelly needs to collect 504,000 signatures to place the repeal on the ballot.

At the start of his petition drive, Donnelly said the DREAM Act would come at a great cost to the state, especially at a time when universities have raised fees by 12 percent across California.

"Here we are, at a time when we have just slashed the university system by $1.3 billion, and there are fewer spots for all students," said Donnelly. "But somehow we have got that money to pay for people who are in the country illegally?"

The DREAM Act is expected to cost $13 million on its first year of implementation. But Democratic Assemblyman Gil Cedillo, who wrote the bill that Brown signed, has said the DREAM Act will help California in the long run despite the cost.

Comments

Avatar for user 'Peking_Duck_SD'

Peking_Duck_SD | October 25, 2011 at 12:25 a.m. ― 2 years, 12 months ago

"Donnelly, a member of the Tea Party and founder of the Minuteman Party in California"

Say no more.

It will be a cold day in Hades before I would sign anything with this person's name attached to it.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Missionaccomplished'

Missionaccomplished | October 25, 2011 at 9:38 a.m. ― 2 years, 12 months ago

SDSU to pay new president one third more | SignOnSanDiego.comwww.signonsandiego.com/news/.../sdsu-to-pay-new-president-one-th...Cached
You +1'd this publicly. Undo
Jul 11, 2011 – SDSU to pay new president one third more. The increase over ...
Show more results from signonsandiego.comCSU Approves SDSU President's Salary Package, Tuition Hike ...www.10news.com/news/28498537/detail.htmlCached
You +1'd this publicly. Undo
Jul 9, 2011 – SAN DIEGO -- The California State University Board of Trustees Tuesday boosted tuition 12 percent for this fall and approved a roughly

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'DonHonda'

DonHonda | October 25, 2011 at 10:34 a.m. ― 2 years, 12 months ago

There are already 7,000 volunteers to start getting signatures with petitions ready this Tuesday. If there was $1Million to be spent, the petitions would be ready in one month. Donnelly is trying to get this done through social media and radio stations.

Here’s more info at:

https://www.facebook.com/standwithcalifornia

http://www.donnellyforassembly.com/

http://taxpayerrevolution.org/

http://stopab131.com/

https://www.facebook.com/StopAB131

http://campaign.r20.constantcontact.com/render?llr=5ugnlcdab&v=0011iPQ44Hokko0R8RrNIvac21sQDJco6R5pvaHhcXlEgqfrtwP9uYKh3cOrgHhwj_1aVDLtNDQpIOE_H5kmANCPlj1fu4SQxbTKw3KfQGbmKI%3D

http://californiascrusader.com/recall-governor-brown/

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-dream-20110901,0,5365623.story

For the first year alone:

“It is not known how many undocumented students would be eligible for the aid. A Senate committee analysis estimated the bill’s cost at about $40 million. That includes $13 million for Cal Grants, which average about $4,500; up to $15 million in community college waivers; and $12 million in institutional aid from the University of California and California State University systems.”

This is clearly Economic Discrimination against US Citizens, Legal Californian Residents, and Legal Immigrants who have seen their tuition rates rise dramatically while not being eligible or have seen their financial aid reduced. It is this discriminated population who ARE our FUTURE.

Also, with the heavy recruitment of out-of-state and Foreign Nationals who can pay nearly twice the in-state tuition rate to refund our defunct education system, Legal Californian Residents and Legal Immigrants will be “priced out” and “placed out” of THEIR American Dream, THEIR higher education.

And here's how AB 131 does not help anyone:

http://www.600words.com/2011/10/ca-dream-act-misleads-all-including-its-beneficiaries.html

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'DeLaRick'

DeLaRick | October 25, 2011 at 11:19 a.m. ― 2 years, 12 months ago

Bills and initiatives which HELP human beings are fought against tooth and nail as if their lives depend on it. Bills and initiatives which fund killing machines and expensive weapons programs are not fought at all.

Tea Partiers and The Minuteman Party have zero credibility until they explain that dichotomy. The rest of the country has to mull that over, too.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Missionaccomplished'

Missionaccomplished | October 25, 2011 at 10:39 p.m. ― 2 years, 12 months ago

@DON HO, "economic discrimination"! LOL LOL LOL That's a good one coming from the Nativist Right. Kinda of a pot-kettle-black moment. What else do you have up your sleeve?

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'LandHo'

LandHo | October 26, 2011 at 5:11 a.m. ― 2 years, 12 months ago

DeLaRick,

Along those lines, did you catch Perry's recent speech in which he pledged to drastically cut social programs? His quotable: "When it comes to national defense, the question is not what does it cost, but what does it take to keep this country safe?"

And I'd call myself an original Tea Partier, too -- but that's the Tea Party that started with Ron Paul, who would not leave the Pentagon off the chopping block; not this hateful disgrace that you see on the tube these days.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'DeLaRick'

DeLaRick | October 26, 2011 at 9:24 a.m. ― 2 years, 12 months ago

LandHo,

The Tea Party would get more support if they hadn't painted themselves into a corner with the whole foreign policy thing. How can anyone be for "less government" and advocate for the status quo as it relates to current foreign policy? How can anyone be for "less government waste" and support these weapons systems that are already obsolete before they hit the battlefield? Aside from the breathtaking hypocrisy, it doesn't square logically.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'DonHonda'

DonHonda | October 26, 2011 at 12:45 p.m. ― 2 years, 12 months ago

That's right, all your Haters. Attack ad Hominem when you have no idea a person's circumstances or political beliefs. That just shows to the world all you know how to do is to Hate and have no valid arguments to come back with.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'DonHonda'

DonHonda | October 26, 2011 at 6:36 p.m. ― 2 years, 11 months ago

And here’s how AB 131 does not help anyone:

http://www.600words.com/2011/10/ca-dream-act-misleads-all-including-its-beneficiaries.html

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Peking_Duck_SD'

Peking_Duck_SD | October 26, 2011 at 9:06 p.m. ― 2 years, 11 months ago

DonHonda wrote, "That's right, all your Haters. Attack ad Hominem when you have no idea a person's circumstances or political beliefs. That just shows to the world all you know how to do is to Hate and have no valid arguments to come back with."

Mr. Honda, maybe you should take your own advice when it comes to immigrants to our country, in particular children who were brought here by their parents through no fault of their own, who have grown up here, and to whom America is the only country they have ever known.

Our country needs educated people - particularly in the sciences - in order to compete globally with nations like India and China.

I support anyone who wants to further their education here and then remain in the U.S.A. as a valuable, contributing member of society, regardless of where they were born or what the color of their skin is!

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'DonHonda'

DonHonda | October 27, 2011 at 10:59 a.m. ― 2 years, 11 months ago

@Peking_Duck_SD

Where have I "hated" any immigrants? All I have done is to discern the difference between Legal Immigrants and Illegal Aliens, regardless of color of their skin--they come in all shades. These are Legal terms used by our government and is even in the title and contents of the Bill AB 131, the CA DREAM Act.

Your argument is just more hating and hate-baiting by confusing the issue and using emotional argument as opposed to logic, common sense, and facts. This includes race-baiting and hating on US Citizens, White People, and Legal Immigrants.

Our country does need educated people. But especially those who can contribute to our society. AB 131 does not offer a path to citizenship, does not guarantee or enforce the "affidavit" to be signed. Most of the State aid offered is based on need and is not merit-based, some requires not min. GPA, while the rest only has min. of 2.0-2.6 GPA--certainly not "the Best and the Brightest." This results in more deserving US Citizens and Legal Immigrants who can and will contribute economically.

And here’s how AB 131 does not help anyone, esp. Illegal Alien Students: http://www.600words.com/2011/10/ca-dream-act-misleads-all-including-its-beneficiaries.html

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'DonHonda'

DonHonda | October 27, 2011 at 11:05 a.m. ― 2 years, 11 months ago

Correction: "This results in more deserving US Citizens and Legal Immigrants LOSING OUT, who can and will contribute economically."

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Peking_Duck_SD'

Peking_Duck_SD | October 27, 2011 at 4:47 p.m. ― 2 years, 11 months ago

Mr. Honda, my comment is not hating - it is realizing that there is more to a person than whether or not they are "legal" or "illegal".

You have this black and white viewpoint that all illegal immigrants are evil.

Yes, coming here illegally is a crime, but it's a misdemeanor, and many extremists from the Tea Party and Minutemen try and make it look like the equivalent of a serious felony.

I favor laws that are reasonable.

And I believe that if an illegal immigrant was brought here by their parents when they were a minor by no control of their own, and they went to school here and made good grades in America, they should be entitled to the same opportunities as far as college help goes. Not "special" opportunities, but they should be allowed to apply for the help just as their other classmates who are legal citizens are.

The young men and women the Dream Act targets are not violent felons, they are not drug dealers, they are not haters of America, they are kids who have grown up here and made good grades and I think it is perfectly reasonable that if their grades are good they can apply for the same college assistance programs their classmates can.

With all that said, I do agree with you on merit. I think there should be a minimum GPA for all the students applying, regardless of their citizenship. But I think that loophole should be fixed as opposed to getting rid of it completely.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'DonHonda'

DonHonda | October 27, 2011 at 5:12 p.m. ― 2 years, 11 months ago

@Peking_Duck_SD Your Hating comment that I think that all Illegal Aliens are evil is absurd and ridiculous. Where have I ever said or intimated such a sentiment. You are projecting your own weird logic or the conversation that you are having in your head. And, you don't know my Political Leanings or my associations to comment on. So, stop the Hating Rants. If I am at the attack of your Hating comments and deem them to be Hating, then guess what--They are Hating.

You seem to be one of those Open Border or Libertarian people--I don't know. But that would explain your illogical meanderings and hostile verbiage--Hate everyone and everything that does not agree with your philosophy.

I'm glad that we agree on the merit issue. But most of the rhetoric I read is that AB 131 students are "The Best and the Brightest", even out-shining "lazy, ignorant Americans." To repeat, most of AB 131 is based on need, not merit with aforementioned low or no GPA minimums required along with fee (tuition) waivers and EOPS. This, along with the heavy recruitment of out-of-state and Foreign Nationals who can pay nearly double the in-state tuition, will cause US Citizens, Legal Californian Residents, and Legal Immigrants to be "priced out" and "placed out" of THEIR American Dream, THEIR place in our higher education.

What would you say to a Legal Immigrant who has gone through and respected our process, has Student Visas, Green Card, etc., on the path to Citizenship that THEY can't be educated because an Illegal Alien Student has taken their place as well as received free money to attend--something that the Legal Immigrant would not have access to? Tough Crapola? That they're are an idiot to go through the Legal way? We are not responsible for the Illegal Actions of their parents. We are not responsible for their plight. Most of AB 131 Illegal Alien Students are adult (12-35) and can now decide to migrate to another country, apply for US Citizenship, or stay Illegally and remain a second class person, and not be employed legally, in fear of deportation at any time.

Don't bother to answer as I'm sure that it'll be more of the same-o from you and I'm done and out in this forum.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Peking_Duck_SD'

Peking_Duck_SD | October 29, 2011 at 1:47 p.m. ― 2 years, 11 months ago

Mr. Honda, my post was not intended to be a personal slam against you, it was to illustrate the pervasive extremism of anti-immigrant hysteria being penetrated through American society by fringe groups like the Tea Party and Minutemen.

While I don't know your personal political leanings, it is safe to lump you in with these people on this particular issue because your arguments are exactly what those of these fringe groups are.

For someone who is highly critical of the tone and "hostility" of others comments, your comments come across as defensive and illogical. It seems to be you who is calling others hateful and making great leaps of personal interpretation based on no merit or evidence when responding.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'HarryStreet'

HarryStreet | October 29, 2011 at 5:48 p.m. ― 2 years, 11 months ago

America does have an obligation to make it easier for people the world over to obtain U.S. citizenship. We take so much from the world to live as we do, it is only fair. There's oil, fruit and vegetables, jobs overseas manufacturing parts for our products that pay day laborers meager earnings. America is a beacon of hope for something better.

But governments of Third World nations need to step up too. Everyone is so complacent with status quo. People in those countries (Latin America) need to revolt in the same way we are in Wall Street and the Middle East. Their voices need to be heard and their governments need to act.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'benz72'

benz72 | October 31, 2011 at 8:22 a.m. ― 2 years, 11 months ago

David, I keep hearing similar statements to your "We owe..."
Con you please explain how you reach that conclusion? As far as I can tell, those accounts were settled when the oil, fruit, vegetables and parts you mention were purchased. Who do we still owe? How much? Why?

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Missionaccomplished'

Missionaccomplished | October 31, 2011 at 11:59 a.m. ― 2 years, 11 months ago

@DON HO, "haters", sounds a little hypocritical coming from a Nativist.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Missionaccomplished'

Missionaccomplished | October 31, 2011 at 12:01 p.m. ― 2 years, 11 months ago

Where have I "hated" any immigrants? All I have done is to discern the difference between Legal Immigrants and Illegal Aliens, regardless of color of their skin--they come in all shades."

LOL We weren't born yesterday, DON HO. Your Nativist undercurrent is all too obvious.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Missionaccomplished'

Missionaccomplished | October 31, 2011 at 12:02 p.m. ― 2 years, 11 months ago

@De Rick, yes, that is one of the contradictions of the Teebirchers.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'no_soup_for_you'

no_soup_for_you | October 31, 2011 at 10:03 p.m. ― 2 years, 11 months ago

Don Ho, sounds like you are doing the hating up in here.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'randolphslinky'

randolphslinky | November 2, 2011 at 11:25 a.m. ― 2 years, 11 months ago

I'm not a member of the Tea Party, in fact I'm a registered Democrat, but on this one I will be signing the petition. DonHonda is correct in his position; it's just common sense, something that Sacramento is sorely lacking. This nonsense will not stand.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'johnnym'

johnnym | November 2, 2011 at 7:05 p.m. ― 2 years, 11 months ago

Simple solution. Let all who think it's ok to enter the US illegally and stay here sign up as donors. Each year the amount spent on in-state tutition for illegal aliens is added up and split amongst the donors. Everybody happy!

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Peking_Duck_SD'

Peking_Duck_SD | November 3, 2011 at 1:33 a.m. ― 2 years, 11 months ago

@johnnym, you wrote: *"Let all who think it's ok to enter the US illegally and stay here sign up as donors."*

Two problems.

(1) I don't think people who were brought here as kids by their parents through no fault of their own are exactly the same as adults who knowingly break the law. You want to punish people who had no control over their fate and lump all illegals into some crude, broad category.

(2) Sometimes the emphasis on this issue is more emotional than it is practical. We live in a first-world wealthy country and have a boarder along a poorer developing country. That is what it is, and people desperate to follow the American dream will try and get here no matter what. Sometimes I think it's more productive to think "these people are here, how can they contribute to make our country better" instead of just simmering in hate and thinking about how to punish people.

The arguments being made by Tea Party and Minutemen types are a waste of time. There is no *financial means*, *political will* or the *resources* to round up even a significant number of the illegal immigrants in our country and deport them. Not to mention the constitutional issues that would arise in any realistic attempt at deporting millions of people.

You want to place the financial burden on those who actually see some benefit in ensuring these people become productive, educated members of our society, but I would turn it around on you.

Perhaps you and people with like-minded views would like to pay for the cost of seeking out, rounding up, and deporting tens of millions of people not to mention the court fees that would result from American citizens of Hispanic and Latino decent who would be profiled unfairly in such an endeavor?

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'randolphslinky'

randolphslinky | November 3, 2011 at 9:20 a.m. ― 2 years, 11 months ago

Consider this, that college age kids who are here legally (through no fault of their own) are discriminated against, that includes people of all colors, backgrounds, etc.

That when you break our laws you have to make amends, you don't get rewarded. What kind of upside down country are we if we say something is illegal to do but then we at the same time offer incentives to break the law?

Yes we need people at the low skill level to help drive our economy, so no; we can't just chase them all out. BUT we have to have a better policy of how we do this, what we currently have does not work, it isn't fair, and it makes a mockery of our country to have laws that are not enforced.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'benz72'

benz72 | November 3, 2011 at 10:31 a.m. ― 2 years, 11 months ago

If we are given the choice between paying to subsidize someone here illegally or paying to deport them I vote for deportation.
If the choice becomes not paying at all and cutting off all subsidies to non-documented persons the I think we have a beeter option, as economic forces may increase self-deportation. Perhaps a round up is not viable, but heavily fining hirers of non-documented workers and providing no state incentive to come or stay here can certainly be effective. Ensure that life here will be no better than life there and the incentive dissapears.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'dherrer1'

dherrer1 | November 3, 2011 at 11:08 a.m. ― 2 years, 11 months ago

Here we go again for the millionth time. What to do about ilegal immigration. This issue is now so polarized that we can't see the forest from the trees. We need to recall some basic facts:

1. Does America have the right to enforce it's immigration laws.
YES! Of course we do but we need to have the laws defined first!

2. Ilegals come to the USA for ECONOMIC reasons!!! Mexico has a formal policy of exporting it's failure in return for billions of dolares it receives in money sent home.

3. The people coming here ilegally are not like the pilgrums... The want a job and a better life so they can support their families back home.

4. Many AMERICANS create the demand that these people come to fill. They are called small business owners and Upper Middle Class families that hire them. The Tea Party ARE these people but what they want is that these people come and work cheap and at night just disappear until the next day and by the way, don't be late to work.

5. Average americans have their heads up their asses. They are willing to give all their personal information to a bank in exchange for credit but refuse to implement a National ID card that would stop these people in their tracks. Just adding a foto to our SS card would be a MAJOR step.

6. I worked as a Manufacturing executive for 30 years in San Diego and Los Angeles. You know how many times my companies were audited by INS for immigration compliance....ZERO TIMES!!!! OSHA was in monthly as well as the fire department and other goverment agencies. Why can't 10% of existing ICE agents be taken away from the border were the sit all day watching the grass grow and start visiting employers and verifying compiance.

7. We need to develop a PLAN as to what to do with the millions of people now here ilegally. Do they all need to go or do we create a path so they can become legal or do we have a temporary worker program, etc. I think we can develop a just plan and still maintain our laws.

Bur first of all we need to decide to deal with the issue at it's root and develop a real plan. To date no one has done this because they don't want to piss off all the employers and middle class women who need nanis to raise their kids. Lets go after the real problem and then implement a real plan to address all the issues including the DREAM ACT.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Missionaccomplished'

Missionaccomplished | November 7, 2011 at 7:47 a.m. ― 2 years, 11 months ago

@JOHNNYM, make the U.S. market's functional need for low-cost labor disappear.

Not so simple, is it?

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Missionaccomplished'

Missionaccomplished | November 7, 2011 at 7:49 a.m. ― 2 years, 11 months ago

BENZ, are you really that ignorant or is just rightwing spin? When you live in the shadows, you are NOT being subsidized.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Missionaccomplished'

Missionaccomplished | November 7, 2011 at 7:58 a.m. ― 2 years, 11 months ago

DHERRER,

2.Ilegals come to the USA for ECONOMIC reasons!!! Mexico has a formal policy of exporting it's failure in return for billions of dolares it receives in money sent home.

3.The people coming here ilegally are not like the pilgrums... The want a job and a better life so they can support their families back home.

# 2 & # 3 you inadvertently prove exactly one of my points. Many clandestine border crossers have NO intention of remaining long-term in the U.S--a fact that demolishes the alarmist paranoia of the Nativists and xenophobes who have cried "invasion," from the Liberty Lobby and KKK in the 70s all the way up to today's neo-Malthusian groups like "Numbers USA," AM Hate Radio and FAUX News. (See Wayne Cornelius's studies in the late 70s as well as Douglas Massey's in 2005--or even Manuel Gamio going as far back as 1926-7. If they are wiring money back home--guess what--they plan to go back home sooner or later!)

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'benz72'

benz72 | November 7, 2011 at 12:36 p.m. ― 2 years, 11 months ago

"BENZ, are you really that ignorant or is just rightwing spin? When you live in the shadows, you are NOT being subsidized."

Are you claiming that these persons consume NO government provided resources whatsoever?

Are you claiming that if these persons go to the ER and do not pay their bill no tax money goes to fund that care?

Isn't there a parallel discussion on this program about the DREAM act? Do you not consider that subsidization for some reason?

There is a cost to living in a society. Somebody is going to pay, and if it's going to be me I'd like to have some say about who get what. Specifically, if someone doesn't care enough to follow the rules and wait their turn, I don't care enough to pay to make their life here better.

BTW, large fonts do not add weight to your statements.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Missionaccomplished'

Missionaccomplished | November 7, 2011 at 12:49 p.m. ― 2 years, 11 months ago

If you read narratives about immigration, authors point out how apprehensive or scared they are of calling the cops when they are victims of crime--or in this case, having to fill out forms for fear of being caught. (Peter Laufer for one in the book "Wetb@ck Nation: The Case for Opening the Mexican-American Border.") Again, it's common sense. I also know of it first hand. Now, that doesn't mean to say that it does not happen. We know it does--but not to the degree as the Nativists claim NOR is it an INCENTIVE in and of itself.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'benz72'

benz72 | November 7, 2011 at 1:04 p.m. ― 2 years, 11 months ago

We can disagree about the frequency, but do we even have a consensus on the propriety?
Do you feel that taxes SHOULD be used to pay for services to persons not present in the country legally?
Do you believe there is any disincentive to be gained by refusing to provide those services?
Do you believe a strong enough disincentive would make the problem less severe?

I think free medical care is a strong incentive for many people. I think free scooling for children is a strong incentive as well. Those services are extremely costly. Lets make sure those who use them are entitled to them.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'benz72'

benz72 | November 7, 2011 at 3:23 p.m. ― 2 years, 11 months ago

I'm aware of the irony in fat fingering schooling as scooling to make it look like I can't spell. I wish it were intentional... oh well. Hope that doesn't detract from the point I'm trying to make.

( | suggest removal )