Correction 2-22-13: The Dream Act of 2010, which Coffman voted against, would have granted a citizenship path to some undocumented children who graduate from high school or enroll in the military. College enrollment was not one of the Dream Act’s paths to citizenship, as erroneously stated below.
Here’s the bill summary from 2010:
This bill would establish a path to citizenship for some undocumented immigrants under the age of 29 who were brought to the U.S. by their parents before the age of 16 and have graduated high school or promise to serve in the military. Applicants for citizenship under the DREAM Act would have to meet certain criteria designed to prevent the bill from being exploited and to weed out applicants that have been in trouble with the law. Immigrants granted conditional citizenship under the bill, pending final status adjustment, would not be allowed to receive federal benefits like food stamps and Medicaid.
It is true, as written below, that Rep. Mike Coffman does not support the Dream Act, because he only supports one path to citizenship (military enrollment) not the second path (high school graduation).
A politician can change his or her mind. Nothing necessarily wrong with that, but when it happens, a reporter should obviously ask about it.
And so it goes with the all the politicians, like Rep. Mike Coffman below, who are now acting nice to undocumented immigrants when not long ago they were big-time meanies.
Just today, Coffman announced that he wants to open military service to so-called "Dreamers," young people brought to America illegally by their parents.
Trouble is, Coffman voted against the Dream Act in 2010, which would have allowed these same young people to attend college in the United States and eventually become U.S. citizens.
Coffman: I am pleased that the President‘s immigration proposal included a plan aimed at expanding the eligibility for military service to the young men and women who were brought here as children through no fault of their own. Today, I introduced the Military Enlistment Opportunity Act that seeks to do just this. Regardless of the final outcome of the larger comprehensive package being discussed by the Senate, I strongly believe this piece of the plan must be adopted. This is a critical issue, not only because it gives these young people an opportunity to earn citizenship through service to our nation, but it will also broaden the pool of eligible recruits for our military.
What's the evolution of Coffman's thinking. Why the change of heart?
Would he still vote against a law allowing Dreamers to attend college in the U.S? Or is military service the best fit for young immigrants, in Coffman's mind?