The DREAM Debate Rages On…

The biggest debate within the Latino activist community that you are not hearing about is the DREAM Act. As I noted earlier, Senator Harry Reid wants to attach it the the Defense Authorization Bill and have it pass under such circumstances. As a result, much debate has been ignited and I myself have wrestled with my political conscious as to what it means to provide a pathway to legalization for undocumented students under the cover of being muzzled on the the growth of the military industrial complex and the continued funding of the Afghan and Iraq war and occupations that I vehemently oppose. Reid’s cynical ploy has created a legislative debate of crude contradictions. (In fact, the military provision in the DREAM Act already had made it a sphinx of sorts, but many peace activists were willing to compromise that point – myself included) Contradictory elements support the DREAM Act embedded in record pentagon spending. Contradictory elements oppose the act as attachment.

Here’s a look at the debate as it is churning out. Raul Al-qaraz Ochoa, who is not undocumented but was arrested in Senator McCain’s office as part of the activist effort on behalf of the bill wrote an open letter to the DREAM Movement as to why, in this critical moment, he is painfully withdrawing his support:

“Strong movements that achieve greater victories are those that stand in solidarity with all oppressed people of the world and never gain access to rights at the expense of other oppressed groups,” he writes after espousing a couple of key points including his contention that, “Democrats are telling me that if I support access to education for all my people, I must also support the U.S. war machine with $670 billion for the Pentagon? Does this mean I have to support the military occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan?”

Ochoa’s reasoning puts him in opposition to the legislation alongside the very Senator whose office he sat in on, but for VERY different reasons. McCain, a one-time supporter of the DREAM Act, has callously reinvented himself as an ultra-xenaphobic lawmaker in the time honored tradition of ‘blame an immigrant’ during an economic recession. The Senator writes in his opposition:

“We learned on Monday that before we go home for this election cycle, there will be no debate at all on the Defense Authorization Bill except for three amendments handpicked by the Majority Leader for narrow political reasons two months before an election. One of those amendments will be on banning the use of so-called ‘secret holds.’ Another will be on the DREAM Act, which allows the children of immigrants who entered the country illegally to become U.S. citizens…. The Majority Leader has no business putting these two amendments on the National Defense Authorization Act, and certainly not as two of only three amendments that will even get to be voted on at a time when our military is engaged in two wars overseas, and when numerous defense issues demand the Senate’s time.”

McCain is wrong. As Reid points out, the military provision in the DREAM Act makes it a not so inappropriate attachment to the Defense Authorization Bill. This fact brings us to a host of opposing viewpoints on that aspect of the legislation. Fernando Suarez del Solar, a respected peace activist who lost his son in the course of the Iraq war, spoke out about the DREAM Act calling for the energy of the movement to eviscerate the military service as a pathway to legalization aspect in favor of reinstating the original community service requirements. He wrote earlier that:

Our young people may not see that this is a covert draft in which thousands of youth from Latino families will be sent to Iraq or some other war torn nation where they will have to surrender their moral values and become a war criminal or perhaps return home in black bags on their way to a tomb drenched with their parents’ tears. How many of our youth can afford college? How many will be able to take the educational option? Unfortunately very few because the existing system locks out the children of working families with high tuition and inflated admissions criteria. Most will be forced to take the military option to get their green card. But what good is a green card to a dead person? What good is a green card to a young person severely wounded in mind and body?

None too concerned with the perspectives of Fernando Suarez del Solar is DeeDee Blase, a founder of the group “Somos Republicanos.” She wrote Senator Reid in support of the DREAM Act as a means to enlarge recruitment as “threats” like North Korea and Iran loom large in her worldview. She writes:

Military experts agree that the DREAM Act promises to enlarge dramatically the pool of highly qualified recruits for the United States Armed Forces and the Department of Defense has expressed support for the DREAM Act since the Bush administration. I urge you to work with fellow Senators who have served our Armed Forces and remind those Senators of the immigrants they served with.  I believe the world has become more dangerous — we have countries such as North Korea and Iran who have promised to increase their nuclear arsenal.  Because of this, we should have as a very high goal to surpass all Department of Defense and military goals as it relates to recruitment and the quality of those recruits.

Blase notes “surpassing” not simply meeting recruitment goals. In spite of the military provision – and it must be noted that Latinos will be a prime target of recruitment in the coming decade – many progressive activists and supporters accepted the legislation as it was. As Ochoa’s open letter noted, “I felt we could subvert the component that was to feed undocumented youth into the military pipeline if we developed a plan to support youth to the college pathway.” This would be a truly daunting task given that 12% of Latinos currently comprise enlistees and the number is expected to double (without the DREAM Act) in the next ten years. For those who, like Ochoa, consider the Defense Authorization Bill attachment a potential deal breaker, there was a response to that as well. Professor Paul Ortiz wrote a letter to progressives in response to their change of support. It opens, albeit unfairly, comparing that painful decision of people like Ochoa to right-wing nut jobs like Michele Malkin and Glenn Beck before going on to reason:

I do not understand the military absolutism expressed by many in opposition to the DREAM act. Yes, elements of the military support the DREAM act. However, the military also supports affirmative action and the concept of equal pay for equal work. Does that mean that we should abandon those principals as well? Yes, joining the military is an awful option that often results in trauma, oppression, and death. Under the circumstances we live in today I always counsel youth to think of alternatives. However, for many of us Latino working class kids, the military was the ONLY WAY we got into college.

The entirety of this debate points to a broken political system. The DREAM Act as a stand alone bill was a popular slogan of the movement during the summer months as Comprehensive Immigration Reform was deported off the legislative agenda. It will no longer be a stand alone bill if it is attached and passed alongside the most egregious military spending in the history of the United States. The complete breakdown of our two party duopoly is further compounded by the fact that the DREAM Act (and ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell) enjoys an overwhelming majority of popular support. A First Focus poll conducted in late June released results showing 70% support of the DREAM. In a functioning democracy, that’s more than enough to pass it as a stand alone bill. Too bad we can not say to have one of those! Should any of us pick up the phone in support of the DREAM Act as a stand alone bill, or is it politically impossible to demand such anymore? If so, why?

The question for many in the debate is not whether college kids who came to this country without papers should be granted a pathway to citizenship. Unless you’re a pendejo know nothing the answer isn’t just yes, but HELL YES. For progressives, the question also isn’t whether or not an enormous military industrial complex should be challenged in times of recession and war when the public good – educational institutions included – is under assault by its “hands off” bloated budget. HELL YES, once more is the answer. Again, the DREAM Act, however, is a sphinx of sorts making doing both “HELL YESES”  an impossibility under Reid’s plan. That’s why we are seeing the debates that are being articulated and played out right now. The question is, within the political confines of our limited power and perverted democracy, how much compromise is too much? From my analysis, the Pentagon will win bigger with the passage of the DREAM Act. It gets it attached to its budget and also can prey on a new pool of raza youth to become foot soldiers of occupation with all that new money coming in. Will defense (read: war) be fed this massive spending anyway? With a weak anti-war movement deflated by “Brand Obama,” the answer is yes. If the college provision of the DREAM Act becomes law, however, life will change for tens of thousands of students stuck in dire circumstances. This can not be so easily discounted. What do these objective conditions prompt in terms of proper action and support?

Locally, the dialogue will continue here in Orange County on Wednesday, September 29th at the Garden Grove offices of Unite Here Local 11 (13252 Garden Grove Blvd # 200) Speakers at the event will include Dr. Jose Moreno, Anaheim City School District Board President, Denise Velasco, Political Coordinator of SEIU, 721 and Adrian Gonzalez, CSUN undergraduate student. The community forum, put on by the Orange County DREAM TEAM, will be from 7-9 p.m.