The article was well written and gave a good amount of information but it wasn't anything new. It's a lot of the same stuff that other reporters have been saying. The author provided a good amount of sources, a couple politicians and even the one who got the DREAM Act started which I hadn't seen much of in other articles. Overall it was slightly bland but still informative.

The journalist ties in a few issues relating to immigration that not many others (at least that I've seen) have put together in one article. I like that she is looking at a wide variety of related issues as opposed to just one specific thing because it gives a wider understanding of what problems people could face trying to go with or against these various laws. I think journalists too often get sucked into small details of a larger whole and miss the big picture, and this article didn't fall into that trap.

This is one of the better articles about the DREAM act. It doesn't delve into the other side of the debate but it gives good reasons and background and sources that confirm the DREAM Acts usefulness. The sources don't just include politicians like most other reports on the issue but also includes one from a researching institute.

This article was just a list of what happened with the DREAM Act and what Sharon Angle has said about it. It gave a good information but was one sided. It presented Angle's side as caring towards American citizens but made Reid look like he just wanted more votes from Democrats and Hispanics. It's not clear whether or not these implied accusations are true because of the lack of sources provided

I liked this story because it presented both sides, people for the Dream Act and people against the Dream Act. While it was obvious that this journalist favored the Dream Act they still addressed some issues and concerns about it. It gave some background about what the Act entails and it was useful information, not just a space filler. The sources that the journalist uses are relevant and they were involved first hand with the Dream Act.

This was an incredibly short report about something that is really important. Only two quotes were provided and they both supported what the journalist was trying to get across. No other types of sources were provided really. I agree with the article but it was poorly written.