DREAMing in the House

So the DREAM Act passed the House (216-198), but as everyone notes, it is hard to see how it could pass the Senate.  Senate Republicans have already indicated they won't allow it to come to a vote.

Since the DREAM Act is one of the least controversial elements of immigration reform, the response (and resistance in the Senate) emphasizes two points.

First, the Obama administration's dramatic increase in enforcement measures will not translate into votes for immigration reform.

Second, the status quo is becoming more and more attractive to many people, which makes mustering votes for reform even more difficult.  For example:

Many of the House Republicans who condemned the bill most forcefully Wednesday referred to the act as a nightmare, not a dream, and argued it would unfairly harm U.S. citizens who would face more competition from newly legalized immigrants in college admissions, federal loans, work-study programs and the workforce.

In other words, it is preferable to keep people in the illegal economy without higher education, where they can continue to provide the rest of us with cash-based services for low wages.  To be fair, these arguments are coming from members of the House who would never vote for reform anyway, but I can see this type of logic appealing to others.