Why DACA recipients should not be deported
DACA refers to the Deferred Action for Childhood arrivals is a department in homeland security that allows certain Americans who are not documented to have their cases of deportation being delayed and giving them access to work permits that are temporary. The eligibility of this program is those who have attained 30 years or younger as by 2012, have been enrolled in a graduate school, and have not been convicted. This is an issue that has raised a lot of debate among Americans. Some argued that the program is not good, while there are others who support it fully. Those against the program argue that DACA hurts the economy and denies American born citizens the privilege of employment. The main focus of this persuasive study is to analyze the reasons as to why DACA should continue being part of American society rather than being deported into their mother countries.
DACA mainly lasts for two years, and for application, one has to pay a fee of $ 495 that is renewable after every two years at the same cost(Batalova np). The federal-state is one of the biggest beneficiaries of their contribution. They do contribute a total of $1.2 billion in terms of taxes. Incase DACA is repealed; the state and local government might lose this enormous revenue. Their contribution helps in the expansion of the country, and thus they deserve to be treated with the utmost respect.
The economic costs of putting DACA to an end would be quite enormous as the country would lose many investment benefits, especially in the development of the future workforce of the nation. Center of American progress made an estimation that the potential economic benefits would be wasted for a staggering amount of $433.4 billion in GDP over this decade. If the administration decides to deport this category of individuals, the cost would even grow up by $76 billion.
The country has always had a challenge with enough personnel in hospitals. This ranges from doctors, nurses to the lower staff. Deporting the DACA recipients simply means that there will be a crisis in the health sector due to the limited number of personnel. The people at the receiving end of this are the patients as they would suffer more (Wadhia 59). The doctors and nurses left will have a lot of pressure. The states will also have to incur additional costs in employing other professionals.
The social effects and costs of putting an end to DACA cannot be measured. Ending it would lead to the disruption and altering the lives of almost three-quarters of millions of American young people, who have tried to stick within the law, never engaged in trouble and have taken party in graduating from schools. Deporting the dreamers would be breaking the commitment made with this category of the group, which has paid $ 465 that covered the entire expenses. Such people would be affected socially as such as a move would lead to the devastation of families.
Many dreamers arrived in America when they were just small children. Dreamers are just like Americans who are native-born. The recipients of DACA do purchase home men also engage in the investment of small businesses. They do also educate American children, and some are nurses and doctors who take part in caring for the sick and the elderly in society. They are real people like us who have made a real contribution to the country. This simply means that we cannot afford to throw them out of the country as it would be depriving the sick and the elderly of any individual who might be in need of being attended to by the DACA doctors who are professionals in the sector.
Subjecting the recipient of DACA into deportation would just cause a lot of harm than even good irrespective of whether one is a child or an adult. Deporting them into third world countries would be acting in an injustice manner. Many of these individuals came into the country when young and didn’t have an understanding of how their mother country looks like. Paul. D Ryan argued that “these are kids who know no other country, who were brought here by their parents and didn’t know another home.” (Singer np) This means that deporting them would be exposing them to more oppression and slavery more so the students since they have not yet begun enjoying the fruits of their education.
Recent studies conducted in the United States shows that many of these children came to the United States when they were just aged six years. The possible effect of deporting one of the DACA recipients to Haiti of Mexico would be leading them to slavery or making the refugees as they would not have an understanding of where they would start as the mother country would be new to them. It takes a lot of years for one to adopt into another environment that has new rules.
More than 25% of the DACA recipients have intermarried, and some have born American children. This means that the children who have been raised by these parents know Americ only.parents are deported, they have to carry with them the children. The children are likely to suffer more just like their parents as they will have to adapt to a new life that they were not used to.
The DACA recipients contribute to the diversity of the country. Undocumented immigrants do originate from various countries. Through them, we are able to understand other countries. This can be in terms of culture, the way they conduct their politics, their leadership structure, among many other components. With such knowledge, we can be able to have a comparison of the successes and failures of our country in comparison to the economy and culture of the other countries.
The main argument for deporting the immigrants who are undocumented is that they are in breach of the law. However, in my opinion, I would say that they are justified to break the law as they are fleeing dire circumstances in their countries. However, I am aim agreement that any breach of law should never be tolerated at any cost or because of any circumstance. However, this is a theory that should not have a bearing on the recipients of DACA. This is mainly attributing to the fact that they never came to their own wish, which means that they are not legally responsible for their actions as they are just minors.
One needs not to be a philosopher or even a legal theorist to be able to realize that a child aged six has got no obligation but to just follow their parents wherever they are going. Subjecting a child into such conditions is inhumanity that is even punishable by God (Bogart 660). Children know nothing wrong; in fact, they do not know what a law is, which means that subjecting them to such conditions is quite unfair.
Terminating the DACA program does not mean that every participant who is under the program will be affected by the deportation. This mainly depends on how the federal-state exercises discretion. This is not the issue. What holds more water is the threat of being deported. It is likely to have an adverse effect on the lives of the recipients, and this will force many of them to remain underground because of fear planning for the long run, which has got lots of uncertainties. This means that the government will also lose as such people will not engage in long term investments, which will deprive the government enough revenue that is contributed by this group.
The United States supports many developing countries to deal with humanitarian problems. It would be very ironic for such a country to mistreat the recipients of DACA by deporting them. In consideration of what led them to flee into the country, they ought to be protected instead of being subjected to such suffering. The United States has enough resources to take care of such individuals without even experiencing the cost. This is by giving them access to programs such as education and medication, sporting activities, among many other benefits enjoyed by US citizens.
The United States has very many immigrants who are not documented, and the government takes care of them without any form of objection. The recipients of DACA recipients are also classified as m immigrants. This means that targeting and deporting this type of group would be a discriminatory act that should not be tolerated. In fact, it would also be ironical for the government to discriminate against a group that is helping in terms of paying taxes which contributes to the growth of the economy.$ 1.2 billion is enough to fund various government projects.
Besides having an impact on the country, the program has been of help to many people, more so the recipients of DACA. DACA has opened many doors and has led to the reduction of stress. Lives changed. Research conducted in various states of the United States showed in just one and a half years under the program, 59% of all those who responded to the research survey had secured a job (Somin, 2020). A fifth of those who had participated in the research study had also secured a paid internship.
Immigrants who are not documented are not denied from having credit cards or even a bank account. Half of those who responded had opened an account after obtaining DACA and were able to save money. (Becerra 850) many do have driving licenses, which means that they could freely drive within the country. Many claimed to have easier access to health services without any form of discrimination.
This group of individuals has been talented in terms of education. This is one of the reasons as to why they are able to secure well-paying jobs. Most of the time, media and political coverage for this group are mainly focused on their education since they are seen as academically gifted(Capps 5). They cannot be compared with other immigrants, as many do not even attend college. The DACA program has been of help as they have been able to attend training programs that have been funded by organizations that are community-based. This is a group that the government should not afford to lose at any cost.
Employers also benefit a lot from this program. In fact, they are the largest beneficiaries of the highly qualified DACA recipients. High skills in an employment setting are very crucial for the success of a company (Panjwani 2). with such Skills, having been registered under the DACA program reduces stress among the recipients, and they are able to provide their services to the maximum since they are not worried by issues such as being deported back to their purported mother countries.
In fact, it is shocking that many DACA students perform well that American students. This is attributed to various reasons. They have come from unstable countries, many were poor and thus had to utilize the available avenues that are in place, such as education in a bid of getting rid of poverty. This attributes to the increase in the number of professionals among the DACA recipients.
Before the implementation of DACA, the immigrants who were not documented could not be able to translate their academic success into professional success. Before the program, the young adults who had attained various advanced degrees found the outcomes of life and work very limited, and they were just the same as those who were not quite educated. They could not access any social numbers, driving licenses as well as other important credentials. The majority of them led a miserable life as they could only engage in menial jobs such as washing toilets and becoming house helps.
In summary, it is not right to deport the recipient of DACA as they contribute to the economy of the country immensely. One has to pay a fee of $ 495 that is renewable after every two years at the same cost as to be enrolled in the program. The recipients of DACA contribute to the revenue of the country. They do contribute a total of $1.2 billion in terms of taxes. Incase DACA is repealed; the state and local government might lose this enormous revenue. With DACA in place, they do enjoy many benefits as they are able to access education, medication, and other services such as driving licenses.
There are various costs that the government will have to incur if they decide to deport them. They include economic and social costs. The study outlines that deporting the dreamers would be breaking the commitment made with this category of the group, which has paid $ 465 that covered the entire expenses. This is an issue that will socially affect them, and they might end up developing mental issues. The economic cost is the country would lose many investment benefits, especially in the development of the future workforce of the nation. The GDP of the country will also be affected as it will decline.
Becerra, Cesar. “Keep the dream alive: the DACA dilemma.” Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education 40.6 (2019): 847-858.
Bogart, Kelly. “Keeping the Dream Alive: Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals and the Necessary Next Step.” Family Court Review 56.4 (2018): 651-663.
Panjwani, Shama. “Life as a DACA Recipient: A Case Study Approach.” Journal of Asia Pacific Counseling 9.2 (2019).
Somin, I. (2020). Retrieved 23 May 2020, from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/09/04/the-case-for-daca/.
Singer, Audrey, and Nicole Prchal Svajlenka. “Immigration facts: Deferred action for childhood arrivals (DACA).” The Brookings Institution (2013).
Batalova, Jeanne, Sarah Hooker, and Randy Capps. “DACA at the Two-Year Mark: A National and State Profile of Youth Eligible and Applying for Deferred Action.” Migration Policy Institute (2014).
Capps, Randy, Michael Fix, and Jie Zong. “The education and work profiles of the DACA population.” Migration Policy Institute (2017): 1-16.
Wadhia, Shoba Sivaprasad. “In Defence of DACA, Deferred Action, and the DREAM Act.” Tex. L. Rev. See Also 91 (2012): 59.