« Course Syllabus | Main | Speed limits enforced in Minnesota »
June 13, 2005
Minnesota's Proposed Dream Act
According to a recent story in the Minnesota Daily, the state legislature proposed a bundle of higher education reforms. Not all the reform measures are covered in this article; instead, it focuses on the Dream Act, which would allow students who have lived in Minnesota for at least three years and who have graduated from a high school in Minnesota to attend public universities in Minnesota, pay the in-state rate on tuition, and be eligible for financial aid.
First off, I'm not sure just from this story in the Daily what exactly the law says; I tend to be a skeptical reader, so I'm not willing to say for sure whether or not the author's representation of it is accurate. If it is, though, apparently people who oppose the Dream Act do so on the grounds that it presents a conflict of interest with federal immigration law, which, as Pawlenty's press secretary said, "'prohibits states from treating noncitizens different from citizens of other states.'"
But State Senator Sandra Pappas disagrees that that the two are incompatible, and she says -- and this is why I brought the article to class -- “'These kids have played by the rules, they’ve studied hard, they’ve gotten good grades and they have a right to an education.'” It's a classic public ethics issue. One side argues that the students have a right to an education (and by implication, that the government should assist by making it easier on them financially). The other side argues that it's unfair to students from surrounding states who are U.S. citizens. One group's rights are in conflict with another group's. Also, notice the name of the act: the Dream Act. The authors of the proposed law chose it deliberately; it evokes "the American Dream," plus it sounds pretty bad to be anti-Dream, doesn't it?
In class, several people mentioned that there are reciprocity agreements that provide tuition breaks for students from some states, which surely ought to factor into any decision made about the Dream Act. Any other thoughts about the Dream Act? Please leave comments under this post if you have them!
Comments
By the way, I did a count in Word and this post ended up being 354 words, so you can see that your posts don't have to be this long.
Posted by: Clancy at June 13, 2005 1:14 PM
I support that if students have lived in Minnesota for at least three years and graduated from a Minnesota high school, they SHOULD ONLY have to pay the in-state tuition. I am cautious as to any proposed laws that would encourage more conservative and elitist rules, especially in Minnesota. I have not researched this topic, but this law seems to point to people not originally from the United States, e.g. foreign students. I frankly get upset when one group is singled out; everyone has the right to an education and this country was built on equal opportunity for all, or, at least that was the understanding. Again, what Clancy stated, using "Dream" in the article title.
Posted by: Debbie at June 14, 2005 2:54 PM
I agree with Debbie that students who have been LEGAL residents of MN for at least three years and have graduated from a MN high school deserve to get the same breaks any other MN student would get. It seems to me that meeting the above criteria constitutes residency, regardless of birthplace.
Posted by: Patti at June 14, 2005 7:14 PM
It will be a good idea not only for immigrants but also for the state if the propose dream act were to pass. Yes, i do agree with Patti and Debbie that those immigrants who have been living in Minnesota for three years and more and graduated from high school should obviously be given in-state rate on tuition. Another thing to remember is that these immigrants pay taxes and they are helping to uplift the state economy.
Failing to pass this dream act will affect the state in other areas. These immigrants wihout education might ended up in the streets and get involve into unscrupulous behavior which will cost the state more.
Posted by: William at June 14, 2005 9:24 PM
I don't really know much about this topic, but from reading the article and the posts by Debbie, Patti, and William, I do agree with all three posts about students who resided in Minnesoata for at least three years and graduated from a Minnesota high school should be able to pay the in state tuition. My comment towards this topic is that I don't even know why non residents students has to pay a different tuition fee for education. I have many foreign friends who are paying alot more tuition fee than I m just because he/she did not graduated from a Minnesota high school. Foreign students who comes to America for a better education after graduating from his/her foreign high school face tremedous pressure financially, and have to pay much more tuition than the in-state residents. The current policy just doesn't make sense to me at all. If anyone has more information in this topic please feel free to reply.
Posted by: Thuc at June 15, 2005 12:12 AM
The Dream Act has actually been followed by quite a few states for over 10 years, Nebraska and California for example. I remember being tempted into going to a Nebraska (where I went to high school) University for that reason. Of course I didn't. I am surprised that so many of you in this class are feeling positive about the Act, because I had come cross some people who explicitly disagree with it, and felt strongly for non-US citizens to pay more for education in this country. Personally, I think everyone that has gone to high school and graduate from the same state has paid enough tax to enable them for the tuition benefit.
Posted by: Eva at June 17, 2005 12:45 PM