This message needs a better source. There is no date on the linked document and it claims that there are some very important and very bad changes. Number 3 is terrible and from what I can gather is incorrect:

The latest I've seen is this: http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=33762 The source doesn't mention anything about the Retroactive Benefits section being removed.

It does say that a "conditional nonimmigrant status for 10 years" has been "created." This is unclear since there was always one, but it was 6 years long (meaning you had 6 years to complete college or military). The Retroactive Benefits section means that if you have completed the education or military service requirement you can apply to remove the conditional status of your permanent residency without waiting 10 years in "conditional" status as the OP in this thread claims.

To clarify, there is no new language that explicitly BANS in-state tuition. I believe there is already a federal law that bans in-state tuition for undocumented immigrants, but the law is being challenged as unconstitutional, which is why we have in-state tuition laws in some states. The actual change according to AILA (dated yesterday) "Eliminates repeal of the in-state tuition ban." All this says is that the federal law will remain what it is and the in-state tuition battle will continue (ie. state vs federal law). In other words, the DREAM Act will not say anything about in-state tuition. This is a good thing, it can get us more votes and you will still be eligible for in-state tuition as legal residents should the DREAM Act pass.

There are too many contradictions floating around and still no actual text of the bill. I'm locking this until somebody submits a better sources (text of the bill).

The AILA link to "latest" text is broken, but I've attached it here. Again, this is probably not the latest, but probably the best that is available at this point.