(Ed note: I originally wrote this for Salon.com a couple of years ago. Hence, the lofty language. But the editor killed my piece because of…the lofty language. Yeah, it took me a while to develop my blog speak. Please read Coney Island is for Murderers to see how far I’ve come!!!)

I came to this country from South Korea when I was two. I learned English by watching cartoons. I graduated from a Seven Sister School. I watch MTV. I work as a writer in Manhattan. My younger brothers are U.S. born citizens and my parents received their green cards three years ago. Ignoring my affinity for cable television, you could say I’m an embodiment of the American dream.

Except I’m not American.

The presidential candidates have touched upon immigration issues and the problematic leitmotif throughout these debates has been illegal immigrants—specifically Mexicans.

When it comes to immigration rhetoric, the American public seems to distinguish between illegal and legal immigrants in the sense that illegals equal bad and legal equals good. During the immigration marches back in May, you’d see Americans holding up signs reading, “We love LEGAL immigrants”. Is this distinction problematic when we’re trying to create comprehensive immigration reform?

Representative Tom Tancredo of Colorado sharpens this distinction by referring to illegals as aliens and legals as immigrants. In an article for The National Review, he asserts, “legal immigrants are not out marching angrily for rights that are already protected by our courts.”

That’s funny. Even though I’ve lived as a legal resident of this country for OVER 25 YEARS, I’ve struggled almost as hard as an undocumented migrant worker to attain my citizenship. What does it say about our current immigration policy when the “socially responsible” immigrants can’t get citizenship? These dubious distinctions only impede immigration reform rather than advance it.

Peter Skerry, political science professor at Boston College and senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, says, “Opponents have denounced illegals for not learning English, not joining the mainstream, or stealing jobs from Americans and to the extent that these complaints are valid, those things are also true of legal immigrants as they are of illegal immigrants. So there’s a real disconnect and confusion in the public debate.” He goes on to explain that “Illegal immigration has become the handle we use as a surrogate to talk about all these other problems regardless of legal status.”

No shit.

In my path to become an American citizen, I’ve learned that it’s not enough to speak English or memorize Broadway musicals to be considered American–you need to endure an obstacle course of regulations. All this makes me wonder…

Who deserves to be here?

I usually don’t like to tell people my status because of the stigma attached to being a non-citizen. Growing up in Miami, Florida, immigration had a negative association with Cuban and Haitian refugees. Was I different from these refugees? After all, I came to this country under different and less politicized circumstances. I’d later come to learn that while immigration’s vocabulary differentiated us, the laws did not.

Apparently I appear more Americanized than my immigrant brethren because when I tell people my status I usually get, “I can’t believe YOU of all people aren’t American.” As if my Americanness were defined by my valley girl patois and pop culture references. This is typically followed by “Why don’t you just become a citizen?” or “If you’ve lived here long enough then aren’t you automatically a citizen?”

Unfortunately, compadres, getting your green card is not like applying for a credit card. In order to be eligible for citizenship you first need a visa to establish temporary residency, then you can apply for a green card to qualify for permanent residency, and after maintaining good status for 5 years you can finally apply for citizenship.

My situation is pretty unique. My father’s employer transferred him to the States and sponsored an H-1 visa which is a specialty occupation visa for professionals in business, law, science, and arts fields. As dependents, my mother and I had H-4 visas. My father never applied for a green card because he always assumed that he would eventually return to Korea. But my parents ended up staying. When my younger brother (an American citizen) turned 21 he was able to sponsor green cards for them. Unfortunately, because I was over 21, I wasn’t eligible.

Family sponsored green cards are one of the most common ways for immigrants to earn permanent status. The U.S. Citizenship and Naturalization Services (formerly INS) allowed 226,000 family based entries for 2006. The Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) which hails itself as “America’s largest immigration reform organization” believes that overall legal immigration should be moderated and limited to nuclear family reunification. Contrary to what restrictionists like FAIR believe, not just any second cousin can be sponsored. According to the USCIS, the intended immigrant must first receive a visa number which is given on a preference system: “First preference is given to unmarried, adult sons and daughters of U.S. citizens. Adult means 21 years of age or older.”

Where do I fall in? Brothers and sisters of adult U.S. citizens are given 4th preference. And within this category, I’m given second preference because I’m over 21. After consulting with an immigration lawyer in Manhattan, I learned that if I applied for permanent residency through family based sponsorship it would take about 11 years to receive a family based visa.

As of now, these visas are currently available for people who filed their applications on August 1, 1995.

Why not just file an application and wait it out, you ask? Because applying for a family sponsored visa prohibits you from working or leaving the country while your application is pending.

Ironically, because of our incongruous immigration laws, if I were an undocumented immigrant, I would be able to apply for Cancellation of Removal which is a type of amnesty given to immigrants who have been in this country for 10 years without permission. According to the immigration lawyer, however, this is still an arduous process.

Another option would be permanent residency through employment. But it’s not so easy with our current visa quotas. I’m currently on a visa by my employer can’t sponsor my greencard. I’d have to find a different employer to sponsor me and based on the size of the company, the employer would have to pay a fee of $1500 plus other legal fees.

You might think, “Since you’re already legally working in this country, isn’t it easy to change your status?” Sometimes employers don’t have the funds to pay the application fees and sometimes they don’t want to deal with the paper work when they can just hire a citizen.

Yeah, finding a job in New York is like finding a boyfriend. No one wants a girl with baggage.

A couple of months ago, I interviewed at one of the top art museums in the city and the human resources manager explained that while they did hire international applicants, they didn’t have their own legal resources. (Meaning I’d have to pay my legal services, which would be fine if I sold my organs for cash.) She also said that the museum frequently turns away accomplished candidates because of visa issues. It was inconceivable to me that one of the most venerable museums IN THE WORLD, whose main purpose was to promote understanding of art from around the world, could not hire employees with expertise in these fields because of visa regulations.

If a company has the financial and legal capability to sponsor a work visa, then it must submit a foreign labor certificate to the Department of Labor. According to the DOL, the employer must prove that there are not a sufficient number of American workers who are willing and qualified for the position and that hiring an immigrant would not impair the wages and working conditions of American workers. The public has the right to protest the hiring of an immigrant and prove that there are qualified American workers for the position.

With all these restrictions, it’s surprising that Americans are worried about illegal immigrants stealing jobs because I’m here legally and I couldn’t steal a job even if I wanted to!!!

Let’s say I finally meet a dream employer who can sponsor a visa, pay legal fees, and submit a labor certificate. I still wouldn’t be guaranteed a work visa. The government only administers 65,000 H-1 visas a year. (6,800 of which are reserved for Chile and Singapore because of free trade agreements.) Candidates are only allowed to file their application 6 months before their start date. So if an organization offered me a position and asked me to start working immediately, I’d have to decline.

The H-1 was originally tailored for foreigners who obtained a 4 year college degree in the U.S. so that they could apply their educational experience in a professional setting.

Not anymore.

Because of the quota, many international students are forced to return to their home country to find work. Opponents lambaste illegal immigrants for hurting the economy but our visa laws are actually penalizing LEGAL immigrants who have paid thousands of dollars in tuition (international students are not eligible for federal aid) while also benefiting foreign competitors by allowing these students to utilize their American education elsewhere. So the U.S. government is actually HURTING their own economy by allowing these bright students to leave.

These are just some of the roadblocks I’ve encountered. And I’m a LEGAL immigrant. The immigration debate is ostensibly about curtailing illegal immigration, yet the current immigration system is impenetrable for legal immigrants like me. Although this piece may not be the best example, you can probably get the sense that I’m fairly educated and fluent in English and ambitious (on some days)—all traits that reformists implore illegal immigrants to adapt. If I fit these categories then what’s getting in the way between me and my green card?

Our country romanticizes immigration rhetoric. We extol immigrants for their hard work and dedication. In President Bush’s national address on immigration in May 2006, he says, “You know what freedom meant to them, and you know that America is a more hopeful country because of their hard work and sacrifice.”

But the romanticism backfires.

We admire immigrants for their intrepid spirit and upward mobility yet sponsor regulations that are socially paralyzing. Does the government offer any incentives to immigrants who play by the rules? According to some of the immigration lawyers I consulted, marriage to an American citizen would be my most expeditious path to citizenship—it would take about 2 years to get my green card. Is this a testament to the American spirit? This country espouses the values of independence, equality, and strong work ethic yet disregards my bachelor’s degree from an elite college or the fact that I have maintained a productive life here for over 25 years. And while marriage would be the swiftest route, I had always envisioned my big day with a Monique Lhuillier dress and Harry Winston ring (immigrants can dream), not some quickie wedding in city hall.

Immigrants—whether they are refugees, migrant workers, or international students—have different purposes for coming to America. And our current immigration system tries to make this diverse landscape fit under one policy umbrella.

That’s why the face of the immigration debate is misleading. By focusing on the stereotypical Mexican immigrant we are disregarding thousands of illegal and legal immigrants who come to this country with long-term expectations. The issue is not legal vs. illegal but who can come here vs. how many. Correlating the immigration issue with illegals will not only hurt our hopes for rational reform and but it gives a false sense of security to existing legal immigrants.

Professor Noah Pickus, associate director of the Kenan Institute for Ethics at Duke University asks, “How do we maintain a commitment for people of varying legal statuses?” He argues that the current debate on illegal immigration will ultimately come to hurt legal immigrants because then the conversation will turn to: we need fewer immigrants in general. Adding that the debates fail to raise a simple but essential question, “How many immigrants do we want?”

Despite these obstacles, I’m determined to stay in the States and become a citizen. My education, social life, and professional aspirations are rooted in this country. My passport may say otherwise but I feel more American than Korean and if I were to return to Korea today I would feel out of place and disconnected—not to mention that I have the Korean language competency of a 10 year old.

Throughout my experience, I’ve learned that it’s not enough to simply have the desire or devotion to become a citizen in this country. If that were the case, then thousands of illegal Mexicans would be granted citizenship for risking their lives to come here. I’m not sure what it takes to be an American citizen. That answer is as elusive as our current immigration system.