Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) is a migration strategy in the United States allowing for some people moved to the country unlawfully as kids in to obtain a two-year renewable time of delayed action from expulsion from the country. Through the policy, the people become eligible to receive a work permit in the country as long as the applicants do not have serious misdemeanors or felonies on their records (Gonzales, Terriquez, and Ruszczyk 184). The main purpose of the initiative is to offer protection to eligible immigrant youths who relocated to the United States as children from deportation. My claim is that the program is unnecessary in the country and should be abolished because it is counterproductive to the nation’s policy of immigration.
Demonstrating that more than 10 million serve as a rivalry between different parties, Congress has consistently avoided the real comprehensive immigrant reform. Instead of focusing on immigration as a humanitarian crisis, the politicians seem to be content to allow the conversation to move from the spotlight to other non-issues. America’s government self-appraisal attitude for enacting the DACA process is proof of an administration that is not ready to resolve the immigration crisis. There is the idea that the president could apply DACA to all the illegal immigrants in case Congress fails to develop an agreement on the reform (Singer and Svajlenka 14). It is vital to concede that there are major pitfalls that come with the enactment of the program. The bottom line is that the initiative is not likely to work in the best interest of the country, rather it will benefit the foreigners with rich opportunities in the United States at the expense of the native citizens.
DACA fails to come with equal access to educational facilities in the in the United States. The action does not grant the beneficiaries financial assistance that is important in pursuing an education in the country. Through the deferred action, beneficiaries are granted social security numbers together with work authorization (Wong et al. 5). However, their status is in the form of “an alien authorized to work.” To be fair enough, the action should accord its beneficiaries the titles of permanent residents or citizens. When the deferred action extends all the undocumented immigrant under such circumstances, their fate remains the same. However, it is important to acknowledge the efforts put in place by the government of the United States to ensure that the foreigners get legal acknowledgment and status in the country (Wong et al. 5). The immigrants get work permits, and living rights that are equal to those of the natives and this is a sensible thing that the opponents of the actions are supposed to recognize.
DACA fails to address the main causes for migration patterns into the United States. It could be important to look into the primary sources of immigration which are associated with poverty and political oppression. Both the political oppression and high levels of poverty are traceable back to the involvement of the United States economic gains at the expense of different global regions (Pope 103). Given that history, and the country’s trend of exploiting immigrants, profitably, have developed a cycle that the administration seems to be unwilling to analyze and for which to take responsibility. It is true that DACA is not a sustainable way of addressing the menace of migration in the United States. However, there is a sense in which it starts to address the impacts that it brings to the people. Minding the plight of the immigrants is a humanitarian act that should be encouraged, and not dismissed on the grounds of not finding the main cause of the menace (Pope 103). There should be an avenue of dealing with the menace of immigration from its origin, rather than dealing with the consequences because they will always recur in a perpetual global society.
DACA fails to come with a guarantee for permanent status on the side of the immigrants. Among the main stipulations of the deferred action is that it is a work permission and amnesty of extradition subject to restitution after every 24 months. If the action were practical to all the illegal immigrant in that way, for the childhood arrivals, it would not grant them a permanent status whatsoever (L. Schmid 64). The menace of expatriation still looms over the immigrant public as political climates continue to be dynamic in such a way that there lacks the guarantee that DACA remains in place. In the run-up to the year 2016 presidential elections, President Trump often campaigned for the deportation of all the immigrants back to their native countries. DACA does not prevent him from doing the same in the 2020 elections. The president can still capitalize on the immigration issue to gain political mileage in the future.
From the deferred action dispensation, Latinos are shown to be political pawns. One of the main flaws of the program is that the Latino vote is taken to be one of the major reasons to pass reforms for both of the major political parties in the United States (L. Schmid 66). There are individual interests to be protected through passing the immigration reforms in the country. The immigration question is not one of the human rights, but rather of the manner in which different voting blocs can be lured into favoring a certain political discourse. It is more so true for the Democrats who took advantage for the Latino support for President Obama (L. Schmid 66). The Democrats held the Latino community hostage politically with half-efforts such as the DACA. The action is mainly used as a political tool rather than a humanitarian initiative. In totality, DACA comes with potential aid for the undocumented immigrants, but it is worth noting that it does so at the expense of the native citizens.
DACA is an initiative that provides for immigrants to be provided with a reprieve from deportation and work permit, renewable after every two years. It has come with many flaws because it fails to address the main issues associated with the surge of immigration at present. The immigrants’ permanent stay in the United States remains unguaranteed with the deferred action. It is used as a political tool by the main political parties in the country rather than a humanitarian way of handling the crisis. However, although the program is not the perfect way to address the menace of migration in the United States, it is a step towards appreciating the threat and finding a solution to the same.