A collegial atmosphere prevailed at Janus Political Union's latest debate, "Should the U.S. Pass the Dream Act?" At one point, Alejo Stark '12 sincerely congratulated his opponent, Susannah Kroeber '11, on her argument in favor of a guest-worker program for immigrants.
"She's made my point better than I could have — bravo," he said.
Roughly 40 students, faculty and community members attended the event, the union's second this year, in Macmillan 117 Monday night. Most of the attendees were affiliated with the Brown Immigrant Rights Coalition, lending an even greater communal air to the proceedings.
Stark, an active coalition member, was asked by the union's organizer, Brian Judge '11, to argue in support of the passage of the Dream Act after Judge saw Stark protesting during the on-campus rally for immigration reform Sept. 20.
The Dream Act, which on Sept. 21 failed to pass through Congress for the eighth time since its inception in 2001, would provide routes to citizenship for illegal immigrants who arrived in the U.S. before age 16. Potential beneficiaries of the Dream Act would have to graduate from high school, be "of good moral character," and either serve in the military for at least two years or complete at least two years of higher education.
Kroeber, a Herald opinions columnist, acknowledged immediately that she was facing stiff opposition to her argument that the Dream Act should not be passed.
"I know I'm in the minority here," she said at the beginning of her opening statement.
Bringing both her experience in gaining U.S. citizenship and her knowledge of gay rights legislation to bear, Kroeber said the act was "fundamentally mediocre" and supported "institutionalized inequality."
"This act expects a much higher level of commitment on the part of people who hope to receive its benefits than average citizens," most of whom never attend college or serve in the armed forces, she said. She added that the act, in conjunction with the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy, could deny citizenship to gays and lesbians.
Stark emphasized the act's economic benefits and normative arguments.
"What sort of country would we be if we punish these children who didn't choose to come here in the first place?" he asked.
Though at this debate, in a departure from the union's normal debate format, the audience did not choose a winner, audience members said they found argument against the act more compelling than they had anticipated.
"I was very impressed with the anti-Dream Act argument," said Antonio Albizures-Lopez, a BIRC member who came to the event to support Stark. "The perspective of a liberal in opposition to this act was unique."
