USCIS released a revised Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification, on 7/17/2017. Among other changes, USCIS added the Consular Report of Birth Abroad (form FS-240) to the list of acceptable documents proving work eligibility.
The 11/14/16 version of the form may be used until 9/17/2017, but employers must use the newest version after that date.
The administration announced its support for the RAISE Act, S. 1720. Introduced by Senators Tom Cotton and David Perdue and backed by President Trump, this bill would slash the overall number of immigrants to the U.S., chiefly by gutting immediate family immigration. It would immediately reduce the total number of immediate family immigrants allowed each year by more than 40% from current levels, and eliminate most categories of family members presently eligible (including children who have have already turned 18, and parents, married children, and siblings of U.S. citizens). It would also eliminate the Diversity Visa lottery, and cap the number of refugees allowed in each year at 50,000.
The bill would create a new “points” system for employment-based immigration. Individuals with English fluency, post-graduate degrees in STEM or professional fields, younger workers, and those with high paying job offers or independent wealth to invest in the U.S. would be given the highest priority, although special points would also favor Nobel Laureates and Olympic individual medalists or other world class athletes. Under the proposed points system, total employment-based visas would be capped at 140,000 annually, which is fewer than the number granted for each of the three most recent fiscal years for which there is complete data.
While the bill’s sponsors state it will strengthen our nation’s economy, there is broad opposition to that view from economists, business leaders, academics and others, including members of Congress on both sides of the aisle. A small sampling of the early reaction to the RAISE Act:
The Cato Institute: here and here
The Council on Foreign Relations
Susan Martin, former Executive Director of the U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform
Various economists quoted in this Eduardo Porter piece in the NYTimes
Many immigration related bills have been introduced in 2017 in the 115th Congress. Most have little chance of passage or are not yet in play. Of those that may take on life, just a few are noted here.
Introduced by Senators Tom Cotton and David Perdue and backed by President Trump, this bill would slash the overall number of immigrants to the U.S., chiefly by gutting immediate family immigration. It would immediately reduce the total number of immediate family immigrants allowed each year by more than 40% from current levels, and eliminate most categories of family members presently eligible (including children who have have already turned 18, and parents, married children, and siblings of U.S. citizens). It would also eliminate the Diversity Visa lottery, and cap the number of refugees allowed in each year at 50,000.
The bill would create a new “points” system for employment-based immigration. Individuals with English fluency, post-graduate degrees in STEM or professional fields, younger workers, and those with high paying job offers or independent wealth to invest in the U.S. would be given the highest priority, apart from Nobel Laureates and Olympic individual medalists or other world class athletes, who would be granted special points. Under the proposed points system, total employment-based visas would be capped at 140,000 annually, which is fewer than the number granted for each of the three most recent fiscal years for which there is complete data.
While the bill’s sponsors state it will strengthen our nation’s economy, there is broad opposition to that view from economists, business leaders, academics and others, including members of Congress on both sides of the aisle. A small sampling of the early reaction to the RAISE Act:
The Cato Institute: here and here
The Council on Foreign Relations
Susan Martin, former Executive Director of the U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform
Various economists quoted in this Eduardo Porter piece in the NYTimes
This bill would allow farm workers who have performed at least 100 days of agricultural work in the U.S. in each of the two years preceding the bill’s enactment, and who meet other conditions, to apply for temporary residency (the “Blue Card”). Both seasonal agricultural visa holders and undocumented farm workers would be eligible. After working for a defined period in agriculture during three to five additional years, Blue Card holders who also meet other conditions could apply for permanent residency, and would no longer be tied to farm work.
The bill would help potentially millions of farm workers who have lived in the U.S. for many years without documentation to come out of the shadow economy and regularize their status. They could then pay taxes (and would be required to prove that they have, prior to gaining residency), pursue educational goals, and improve their and their families’ lives.
While the Legislature’s fight over the budget and the brief State Government shutdown captured the headlines, MeBIC followed several bills affecting Maine’s immigrants and their employers. Here’s a brief recap.
SUMMARY: This bill would increase funding for English as a Second Language classes offered by school districts’ adult education centers, in order to eliminate waiting lists for classes, and to expand the classes offered in communities experiencing an increase in immigrant residents. It also would: provide funding for contextualized English classes combined with job training at worksites; fund expansion from Portland into Lewiston-Auburn of the New Mainers Resource Center, which helps professional level immigrants integrate; and would provide small planning grants to communities experiencing growth in their immigrant populations.
MeBIC’s POSITION: SUPPORTED. Several of MeBIC’s Board members were involved in crafting this bill. MeBIC lobbied for LD 1492 and testified in its favor, as did several of MeBIC’s Partner Organizations.
OUTCOME: The bill emerged from Committee with strong bipartisan support. However, due to the contentious budget battle, the bill was carried over until 2018, to avoid falling victim to funding issues.
SUMMARY: In its initial iteration, this bill would have required all Maine employers to enroll in the federal E-Verify computer system to confirm employees’ legal eligibility to work, but also would have required E-Verify’s use in an unlawful, discriminatory, fashion. MeBIC pointed out this enormous problem to the committee’s legal analyst, who concurred. The original version was subsequently withdrawn and replaced with language requiring all public employers in the state and all of their contractors or subcontractors to use E-Verify.
MeBIC’s POSITION: OPPOSED. MeBIC actively lobbied against LD 1307. E-Verify is time consuming and costly to implement, particularly for small businesses without dedicated HR staff or those with large seasonal increases in employees (despite the fact that enrollment and use of the web platform is free). E-Verify also returns a worrisome percentage of erroneous “tentative non-confirmations” of legal employment eligibility. Efforts to mandate use of E-Verify by all employers nationally have consistently failed in Congress due to its flaws. E-Verify in its current form should not be mandated in Maine.
OUTCOME: LD 1307 was defeated.
SUMMARY: General Assistance (G.A.) provides safety net subsistence level support for those who have nowhere else to turn. Since 2015, it has been available to noncitizens who are legally here and seeking permanent status in the U.S., such as asylum seekers, for a maximum of 24 months. Asylum seekers cannot get authorization to work under federal law until their asylum applications have been in process with the U.S. government for at least 180 days, and they are ineligible for federal means-tested benefits. G.A. helps asylum seekers, who are not sponsored by any agency, survive and remain in Maine while awaiting their work permits. With Maine’s declining population, investing in supporting asylum seekers in the short term, so that they can be part of our workforce and our communities in the long term, is an investment in strengthening Maine’s economy.
MeBIC’s POSITION: Several individual businesses wanted to make the case at the State House that retaining limited G.A. eligibility for asylum seekers and others on the path to permanent immigration status is a smart investment in Maine’s economy. MeBIC’s Director supported their efforts, and also provided talking points to several Republican and Democratic legislators who requested them, making the economic case for G.A.
OUTCOME: G.A. eligibility for immigrants was retained in the approved biennium budget.
