IN MEMORIAM: Yesterday, our dear friend and colleague Elizabeth Edwards passed away, after waging a courageous struggle against breast cancer. With her trademark courage, activism, and strong sense of justice, Elizabeth directly confronted the inequalities of the American health care system and the politicians who perpetuated them. Writing on our ThinkProgress blog in 2008, Elizabeth — who was a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress —  challenged conservatives for releasing a health care plan that would have excluded millions of Americans who suffered from pre-existing or chronic conditions. “Why are people like me left out of your health care proposal,” Elizabeth asked Republicans. Through congressional testimonies, public speeches, blog posts, and countless television appearances, Elizabeth emphasized the human and moral dimension of the health care debate. We’ll miss her greatly, but we won’t forget her wonderful legacy. CAP President and CEO John Podesta said, “Her legacy is the passion, resolve, and optimism that she brought to her work, and it will give us the sense of renewed purpose to keep fighting for fairness.”
On Monday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV)  filed cloture on the Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act, setting the stage for a vote to take place as early as today. Last Thursday, Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-IL) announced that the House of Representatives would  be moving on the DREAM Act later this week. The House is also expected to vote today. Gutierrez went as far to say that “the bill has enough support to pass through the lower chamber,” according to  The Hill. However, getting the 60 votes needed in the Senate is proving to be an uphill battle. Politico predicts that “[w]hen the Senate roll-call vote comes up Wednesday, there may be few, if any, GOP supporters.” Rather than debating the DREAM Act on its merits, many Republicans are resorting to lies and misinformation to justify their opposition to a bill that would allow young undocumented immigrants who were brought to the U.S. by their parents from becoming productive members of society. As Michael Gerson, a former Bush aide,  explained in the Washington Post, “The Dream Act would be a potent incentive for assimilation. But for some, assimilation clearly is not the goal. They have no intention of sharing the honor of citizenship with anyone called illegal — even those who came as children, have grown up as neighbors and would be willing to give their lives in the nation’s cause.”

POLITICS OF FEAR: Ever since Reid indicated that he would introduce the DREAM Act, Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL), together with Reps. Steve King (R-IA) and Lamar Smith (R-TX), have been leading the GOP’s attack against it. According to  Sessions and many of his Republican colleagues, the DREAM Act would give preference to “illegal aliens,” create loopholes for terrorists, destroy the economy, and encourage more illegal immigration. “The arguments mustered in opposition to the DREAM Act have never been particularly persuasive,”   writes the Center for American Progress’ Marshall Fitz in a piece exposing the flaws in DREAM Act opponents’ most common arguments. Now that Reid recently introduced a modified version of the DREAM Act that specifically addresses just about every criticism of the original bill, these arguments simply don’t hold any water. DREAM Act applicants must go through a rigorous process of background checks, in addition to paying taxes, learning English, and either serving in the military or attending college. The new version does not confer permanent immigrant status to anyone for at least ten years. Instead, it grants “conditional nonimmigrant status” and specifically excludes nonimmigrants from the health insurance exchanges, Medicaid, food stamps, in-state tuition or Pell and other federal grants. DREAM Act individuals would have very limited ability to sponsor family members for a U.S. visa and would have to wait at least a decade before they would even be able to do so. The new bill also lowers the age cap for eligibility from 35 to 29 on the date of enactment.

ECONOMIC BOON: Even after Reid introduced a modified DREAM Act last week, Sessions and his fellow Republicans continued  demanding that it be put on hold because lawmakers haven’t been given the opportunity to “properly review and consider the legislation prior to a vote.” One of his primary complaints was that the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) had not yet scored the costs associated with enacting the legislation. On Friday, the CBO released its  results. The CBO found that putting thousands of young, undocumented immigrants on a path to legalization would increase revenues by $2.3 billion over ten years and reduce the deficit by $1.4 billion over the same time period. The CBO score didn’t come as a surprise to those who had already studied the issue. Rather than working in the underground economy, DREAM Act students who receive a bachelor’s degree would have the opportunity to actually use their college education to boost their income which results in increased tax revenue. A recent   study by the UCLA North American Integration and Development Center showed that the total earnings of DREAM Act beneficiaries over the course of their working lives would generate approximately $1.4 trillion to $3.6 trillion over a 40-year period. Arizona State University   found that people who obtain a bachelor’s degree earn approximately $750,000 more over the course of their lifetime than those who only have high-school diploma. Though the CBO did note that “the bill would increase projected deficits by more than $5 billion in at least one of the four consecutive 10-year periods starting in 2021,” it did not provide a complementary estimate of how much money legalized youth would continue to pay into the system after 2020. It’s reasonable to expect that if they contribute $2.8 billion during their first ten years working in the U.S. with a “conditional nonimmigrant” status, this number will continue to grow as they progress in their careers and eventually qualify for legal permanent residency and, ultimately, citizenship.

A COSTLY ALTERNATIVE: Unfortunately, neither the revised version of the DREAM Act nor the positive CBO score seem to have had a significant impact on the Republican mindset. In fact, even Sen. Richard Lugar (R-IN) — who co-sponsored the DREAM Act in 2009 — is  saying he “doesn’t like the political games being played” and is exploring his options. Yet, the alternatives the GOP proposes would cost billions more than even the most  far-fetched estimates put forth on the DREAM Act so far. The Center for American Progress recently found that a successful policy of mass deportation would total approximately  $285 billion within five years alone. It would also cost each American man, woman, and child $922 in new taxes. Mass deportation would amount to a $2.6 trillion in cumulative lost GDP over ten years, not including the actual cost of deportation. Since it costs approximately $23,148 for each person to be apprehended, detained, legally processed, and finally transported it would cost about $25.5 billion to deport the 1.1 million undocumented immigrants who would actually receive legal permanent resident status as a result of the DREAM Act. Of course, these costs don’t even take into account the lives enforcement-only immigration policies destroys and the communities it tears apart. Meanwhile, it is projected that by 2025, our nation will be short  16 million college-educated workers. To retake that top spot in educational attainment, the U.S. would have to add 1 million college degrees per year through 2025. Put simply, passing the DREAM Act could help abate a national crisis. Deporting talent will only make a bad situation worse.