One-sided and biased opinion piece. Only includes quotes from the anti-amnesty perspective and makes unsubstantiated claims and generalizations, e.g. "one sector of the state’s residents that haven’t suffered cuts are illegal aliens." For fair and informative commentary on the California Dreaming Act, look elsewhere.

This opinion piece is very clear in it's argument: California is favoring illegal immigrants over its legal citizens by proposing the Dream Act. The author provides a number of statistics to which we are given no source, and many of the arguments that the author uses are quotes from other "critics". One quote is provided from the author of the bill, which actually supports this writer's argument that the bill is very costly, and one quote is provided from PR Newswire to give a factoid about the bill. The rest of the quotes are from various opponents of the bill, and the first half of the piece hangs on these. The second half of the piece provides a whole host of statistics, once again without a source, about the condition that ... More »

A clearly one sided article that was poorly sourced and did not help expand on the issue of the DREAM Act. The author did not give the supporting side of the DREAM Act any time, and the article was poorly sourced with such vague terms as "critics" and "proponents". The article did not help clear the confusion of the issue; it merely exacerbated the problem by spreading misinformation by omitting information that works against its main argument. Overall not a good piece of journalism to help understand the complexity of the DREAM Act.