House Panel Approves Controversial Immigration Bill

The Washington Post reports that the House Judiciary Committee approved the SAFE (Strengthen and Fortify Enforcement) Act on a party-line vote of 20 to 15. The bill will make it a federal crime for illegal immigrants to be in the United States. State and local governments would be permitted to draft their own immigration laws under the bill, as long as they do not conflict with federal statutes. State and local governments would also have more power to arrest and charge immigrants for overstaying visas or entering the U.S. illegally. Democrats have objected to the legislation for multiple reasons; some worry that increased efforts to enforce immigration law could lead to an unsafe diversion of police forces, while others are concerned that crime victims and eyewitnesses may refuse to cooperate with police for fear of potential deportation.

The committee also plans to debate and approve a GOP-backed proposal that would establish a temporary visa program for agricultural workers. This program, called The Ag Act, would permit eligible workers to stay and work in the U.S. for up to 36 months, followed by three months of leave. Farm workers would be required to leave the country once every 18 months after their initial stay. The bill has met some opposition from congressional Democrats, farm workers unions, and immigrant advocates who think the bill could create a class of low-paid temporary workers with limited tax and welfare benefits.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/06/19/house-panel-okays-immigration-bill/2437561/

*

Lew: Immigration Reform Critical to Solving Entitlement Crisis

Thehill.com reports that Treasury Secretary Jack Lew argued for the passing of the comprehensive immigration reform bill in the Senate. He claimed that it is critical to keeping Social Security and Medicare from becoming insolvent; if “millions of immigrants” are put on legal payroll, the country could see “hundreds of billions of dollars” being added to the Social Security Trust Fund over the next 10 years, as well as “tens of billions” into the Medicare Trust Fund. Earlier this year, it was reported that Medicare would reach insolvency by 2026, while Social Security’s two trust funds will reach the same fate in 2033. Lew also said that immigration reform was important for matters of “fairness” and “economic opportunity” by bringing immigrants out from “the shadows” and into mainstream economy.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/306129-lew-immigration-reform-needed-to-keep-entitlement-programs-solvent

*

USCIS Invitation and Alert: E-Verify’s New Ability to Communicate Directly to Employees

USCIS has announced that it will now be able to use E-Verify to directly notify employees of various issues with their employer’s checking them in the electronic verification system. If an employee voluntarily provides his or her email address on the revised Form I-9, E-Verify will simultaneously notify the employer and the employee of a TNC (Tentative Nonconfirmation). TNCs occur when information provided to the employer regarding the employee is inconsistent with data found in either the U.S. Department of Homeland Security or Social Security Administration records. E-Verify will also notify employees about the possible need to update a Social Security or Department of Homeland Security record, as well as remind them via email if, after four days of receiving a TNC, no action has been taken to resolve the issue. Providing an email address is entirely voluntary, and employers are still required to directly inform employees of TNCs.

*

Immigration Law Changes Seen Cutting Billions from Deficit

The New York Times reports that legislation to overhaul the immigration system in the U.S. could cut close to $1 trillion from the federal deficit over the next two decades. Congressional budget analysts estimate a net increase of up to 10.4 million permanent legal residents, an increase of about 1.6 million temporary workers as well as their dependents, and a decrease of approximately 1.6 million unauthorized residents if the legislation goes through. According to analysts, the net effect of adding these additional taxpayers would decrease the federal budget deficit by $197 billion in the first decade, then by an estimated $700 billion in the second decade. However, the figures for the first decade do not take into account the $22 billion of discretionary spending required to implement the bill.

The report was followed by commentary from House Speaker John A. Boehner, which could lead to trouble passing the bill. Boehner faces pressure from both parties in handling the immigration bill. House Republicans warned Boehner that his speakership could be at risk if he attempts to force the bill through, so Boehner expressed that he would not bring the measure to the floor unless it had the support of the majority of his party. In doing so, he risks being removed as speaker by violating the “Hastert rule,” an unofficial principal named for former speaker J. Dennis Hastert who rarely allowed a vote on a bill that did not have the support of a majority of his conference. In insisting on majority support from his party, Boehner hopes to bring legislation that would be otherwise opposed by Democrats, such as border security requirements and limits on attaining legal status, to the floor.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/19/us/politics/boehner-says-he-wont-push-through-an-immigration-bill.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

*

Implementation of the Supreme Court Ruling on the Defense of Marriage Act

The Secretary of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano, has announced that USCIS will begin reviewing visa petitions filed on behalf of same-sex spouses in the same manner as those filed on behalf of opposite-sex spouses. U.S. Citiziens or lawful permanent residents married to a same-sex foreign national can now sponsor their spouse for a family-based immigrant visa. After filing a Form I-130, eligibility and admissibility will be determined according to applicable immigration law; applications will no longer be automatically denied based on the same-sex nature of the marriage. Additionally, individuals who were married in a U.S. state that recognizes same-sex marriage but who currently live in a state that does not can still file an immigrant visa petition for their spouse. USCIS generally looks to the law of the state in which the marriage took place, though the general rule is subject to limited exceptions.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy of Vermont attempted to add an amendment to the immigration reform bill guaranteeing family visa rights to same-sex spouses, but was forced to drop the amendment at the risk of losing the GOP vote. The Supreme Court’s ruling on DOMA renders the need for such an amendment moot. The legislation could affect as many as 36,000 same-sex couples.

Couples can begin applying for U.S. visas immediately.

http://www.dhs.gov/topic/implementation-supreme-court-ruling-defense-marriage-act

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/gay-marriage-ruling-immigration-bill-93420.html

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/07/gay-marriage-visas-supreme-court-93647.html

For more information on this topic, see this month’s ABCs of Immigration article.

*

Anti-Deportation Bill Advances as Immigrants Rally

The LA Times reports that undocumented immigrants recently staged a rally at California Governor Jerry Brown’s Capitol office to show support for legislation to reduce deportations. The bill, known as the Trust Act, would limit local law enforcement from working with federal authorities to detain immigrants who are in the country illegally unless they commit certain crimes. The bill would also leave more discretion in the hands of judges rather than district attorneys in handling individual cases. Gov. Brown vetoed a similar bill last year, saying too many criminals would be exempted from deportation. The bill’s author, Assemblyman Tom Ammiano, is working to making changes that would win Gov. Brown’s support. A Senate committee has already approved the bill.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/political/la-me-pc-california-immigration-deportation-bill-20130702,0,6093147.story

*

Issa’s Tech-backed Skills Visa Act Passes House Judiciary Panel

The Hill reports that the House Judiciary Committee passed a tech-backed immigration bill from Rep. Darrell Issa of California. The bill would increase the number of H-1B visas for highly skilled foreign workers, as well as make 55,000 green cards available to foreign graduates of U.S. universities with advanced technical degrees. The bill would also eliminate the diversity visa and siblings of U.S. citizens green card programs. The vote was split on party lines, with Republicans voting in favor and Democrats voting largely in opposition due to the elimination of the aforementioned visa programs.

http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/308439-issas-tech-backed-skills-visa-act-passeshouse-judiciary-panel

For a section by section summary of the SKILLS Visa Act, see:

http://blogs.ilw.com/entry.php?818-Section-by-Section-Summary-of-the-House-High-Skilled-Worker-Bill-(With-Amendments)

*

CNN Poll: Big Generational Divide in Immigration Battle

CNN reports that a recent nationwide telephone poll reveals the opinions on immigration reform are notably divided along generational and party lines. According to the poll, 51% say they support a bill that would attempt to increase border security and create a pathway to citizenship for many undocumented immigrants, with 45% opposed. CNN Polling Director Keating Holland says that support comes mostly from Democrats, with independents and Republicans split down the middle. Additionally, he claims that “senior citizens opposed the bill by a 17-point margin, while younger Americans tend to favor it.” The poll also returned that 62% of those questioned believe that border security should be the primary focus of U.S. immigration policy, while 36% say that creating an eventual path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants should be the top priority. Republicans and independents support strengthening border security, and Democrats are split on the question. Participants aged 35 and older largely favor border security, but those aged 18-34 are split on what is most important. The poll also indicates that 56% disapprove of Obama’s performance in handling immigration issues.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/06/18/cnn-poll-big-generational-divide-in-immigration-battle/

*

Bush Institute Backs Immigration Reform as Bullish on U.S. Economy

ABC News reports that Matthew Denhard, a research fellow at the George W. Bush Institute, published a book exploring the economic benefits of immigration reform. Denhard claims that immigrants “fill the gaps” in the U.S. labor force both in high skill and low skill employment areas. In his book, Growth and Immigration: A Handbook of Vital Immigration and Economic Growth Statistics, Denhard found that immigrant-owned businesses generate an estimated $775 billion in annual revenue. Currently, one in ten American workers are employed by an immigrant-owned business, and more than half of all engineering and technology firms in Silicon Valley started between 1995 and 2005 were founded by an immigrant entrepreneur. Denhard states that it is “very clear” that immigrants come to America with the intent to work, and that “arguments against reform based on immigrants taking American jobs are very weak.” These arguments pull from the “Lump of Labor Fallacy,” which assumes that labor is an exhaustible resource.

The George W. Bush institute sponsored the research and the book. Bush families have pushed for immigration reform for decades, both under George H.W. Bush and later under George W. Bush during his attempt to reform in 2007.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/bush-institute-backs-immigration-reformbullish-us-economy/story?id=19478755#.UcnAIthO18E

*

E-Verify Divides House Panel along Party Lines

Politico reports that members of the House Judiciary Committee engaged in heated discussions on the immigration reform bill’s E-Verify provision. The provision passed with relative ease in the Senate, but has brought discussions in the House to a standstill. The House’s version of the bill, like the Senate’s version, requires all employers to use E-Verify, adds provisions to lock Social Security numbers, and it gives employers an out if they make “good faith” efforts to comply with the requirements. It differs from the Senate’s version of the bill in that it focuses on new hires, starting the phase-in process much sooner. It has also provides few safeguards for employees incorrectly labeled by the Senate’s photo matching requirements.

Rep. Zoe Lofgren, a Democratic representative from California, stated, “Without top to bottom reform of our immigration laws, expanding E-Verify would devastate the agricultural industry, result in closed farms, a less secure America, and the mass offshoring of millions and millions of U.S. jobs.” Many Republican House members support the provision, believing it could be a vital tool in combating identity theft and reconstructing the nation’s immigration laws. Other members, such as Rep. John Conyers of Michigan, think the enforcement of E-Verify will fail to address the 11 million undocumented individuals currently present in the U.S. Currently, only 7 percent of employers use the system.

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/e-verify-divides-house-panel-along-party-lines-93476.html

 

Back | Index | Next

Disclaimer: This newsletter is provided as a public service and not intended to establish an attorney client relationship. Any reliance on information contained herein is taken at your own risk.

I Accept

This site uses cookies to offer you a better browsing experience. If you continue using our website, we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies on this website and you agree to our Privacy Policy.