DACA accepts “Dreamers”, as they are often referred to, on a selective eligibility-based basis. Applicants and/or current individuals must undergo a qualifying and renewal process to receive and maintain their status in the US under restrictive guidelines put in place by DHS Department of Homeland Security. It is an enforced immigration law and policy saturated with government regulations that is controlled and dictated by executive political power who in turn determines who qualifies for allocated resources. It is also posing an underlying threat for undocumented immigrants in a biased selective service system to either enlist themselves in some form of military service or college as a reproach to expedite their deportation if they neglect either of these options. Immigration for this policy favors economic cost effectiveness in terms of immigrants being more beneficial for economist and Americans, “(Chao & Yu 2002) …the beneficial result of immigration to the host country relies on the assumption of perfect competition in the goods market”.
The economic evidence is spread out amongst a wide range of innovative effects in the forms of: the price of goods and services, the number of jobs, government finances, and even wages. Evidentiary support shows that immigration has a positive impact on America and the economy from higher rates of patents, entrepreneurship, and the overall improvement for the livelihood of Americans. Lower costs, economy-wide, were also found ranging from cheaper groceries, to less expensive childcare, and boost in employment because immigrants are not only workers they are consumers too. The underlying assumptions as to how DACA money and services are allocated are reflective of “(Fathali, Heather 2013)…the development of prosecutorial discretion, the role of judicial review over agency decision-making, and the history and the application of prosecutorial discretion in immigration law.”
DACA amnesty program was announced by presidential decree, DHS has told Congress that no funds are being taken from other sections of the agency to pay for DACA. They claimed the young adult-applicants are being charged fully and fairly for this service, however, details were always sparse and never consistent. Application cost and processing fees must be properly based on the actual costs to the Government and the value of the service provided.
Although this law and guidance are not strict, hitting lawful applicants with inflated costs does much to render them meaningless.
Conclusion
Will submit when everyone has submitted their parts.
References
- Fathali, Heather (2013). The American DREAM: DACA, DREAMers, and Comprehensive Immigration Reform., 37(1), 221-254.
- Chao, Chi-Chur, Yu Eden S.H. (2002). Immigration and Welfare for theHost Economy with Imperfect Competition., 42(2), 237.
