Assemblyman Gil Cedillo’s AB 130 which he has dubbed the “California Dream Act” would allow people who are not legal residents of the United States receive financial support when going to California’s public colleges and universities.  His legislation passed out of the Assembly this morning.

Were I a member of the California Assembly (God forbid), I would have voted against this legislation, and spoken against it on the floor.

To me, this is a bill that is first and foremost about the issue of criminal immigration into the United States.

While it is true that it is the responsibility of the federal government to keep people from entering this country without permission (there is a legal process for coming into the country that should and must be used by all those seeking residency in the United States), the illegal immigration problem has become so large that frankly there is a role for every level of government to play, as well as a role for the citizenry to play.

Public policy for the State of California, when dealing with the issue of criminal immigration, should be looked at with an obvious question in mind — would this policy reduce the incentive for criminal immigration, would it increase it, or would it have no impact at all.  I would submit that it is the responsibility of state legislators to pass laws that decrease incentives for people to criminally enter the United States, and come to California.

Because this is the perspective that I have when looking at bills that make more services and opportunities, via government action, available to people who come here illegally (or in this case, perhaps the children who are brought here via the criminal act of their parents), I think AB 130 is poor public policy.  When someone outside of America is decided whether to violate U.S. immigration laws and come into this country without permission, in this case, someone with children or who intends to have children, the so-called “Dream Act” provides more to put on the “benefits” of illegal immigration side of things.

To be honest with you, I consider myself to be a pretty libertarian guy when it comes to the immigration question.  Where it not for two major concerns, I would be pretty sympathetic to a virtual “open border” in terms of people coming into America.  The first concern is security.  Since 9-11, we all have to be more concerned about who is coming into this country, and understanding whether some potential people entering the country pose, or could pose a national security threat.  The other concern is our evolving modern welfare state.  Legal residents of the U.S., especially in California, get a lot of services courtesy of the taxpayers.  This unfairly puts taxpayers in the awkward position of trying to figure out some sort of immigration policy that would allow one to figure out who is coming here to work and contribute, versus who may be coming here — to be blunt — because the “safety net” of social welfare programs in the U.S. provides a better standard of living that whatever they have going on in the country of which they are a citizen.

Solve the security and welfare state issues, and you solve (for me) the illegal immigration problem.  Until then, bills like AB 130 are simply poor public policy because they create more of a reason for parents (or those who want someday to be parents) to illegally cross the border into the United States.

I am sympathetic that children are victims in this situation — but so are all of us — victims of the willful flaunting of U.S. laws by the adults that bring them here.

This entry was posted on Thursday, May 5th, 2011 at 1:26 pm and is filed under Blog Posts.