Dream Act passage in a lame duck session?

[rob in cal]

Senator Durbin suggested that the Senate might take up the Dream Act, which would give citizenship (or begin the process anyway) to illegal residents in the US who go to college or serve in military.  The question is, if the Senate passed it, would the house also take it up?
Also, would enough Republicans (perhaps bolstered by new members from Colorado, West Virginia, maybe even New York who I believe would join the Senate immediately after their election as their elections are special elections) in the Senate go along with this, or just filibuster it to death?

[rob in cal]

Opponents of the bill claim that to qualify one wouldn't need to actually serve in the military or graduate college, just show the intention to do so. Not sure if thats the case or not.  One idea that seems reasonable to me is to give those H1 visas to people in this category, not to people overseas. In that way, this doesn't lead to any new extra immigration, (legal immigration is already at somewhere about a million a year) so it could be a compromise to appeal to conservatives as well as liberals.

[rob in cal]

The Hill is reporting that the Dems are in fact considering the Dream act for this lame duck session.  In years past Senators Nelson (Nebraska), Mckaskill, Webb, Dorgan and Tester voted against full amnesty, but that doesn't mean they'd be against a reduced version such as the Dream Act.  Opponents claim that there is no time limit on it, which if in fact is the case would represent a nice juicy loophole going forward for more and more legalization year after year.  No wonder most Democrats are for this, and most Republicans are against it.

[rob in cal]

Sen Reid has repeated his promise to bring up the Dream Act in the lame duck session.  He says he just needs a few GOP votes to make it happen.  I guess he's assuming the House will follow suit, but I don't know if thats correct.  A whole bunch of blue dog Democrats, defeated or not, might not want to finish their career with one more act of obedience to the House leadership.
Concerning the Senate, Tester, Mccaskill, Webb, and Nelson have all voted against full amnesty in the past and are facing reelection next cycle I believe.  Also, if Kirk and Buck win and can get seated in time they'd likely vote for filibuster, and I wonder about Manchin.  This might be a great opportunity to establish himself as a true independent Democrat and against party leadership.