 |
|
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
March
2009 Newsletter March 31, 2009 DEAR CLIENTS AND FRIENDS: Had you told me last week that Comprehensive Immigration Reform (CIR) would be debated and maybe even passed in this current term of the Congress during the worst economic crisis of our time, I would have laughed. However, after spending two days on Capitol Hill for the 2009 National Day of Action sponsored by the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA), my opinion has changed dramatically. While immigration remains a contentious issue, we may be closer to seeing CIR this year than I had previously thought. AILA is comprised of over 11,000 immigration attorneys across the country and is a lead organization in promoting immigration reform. On March 18, almost 500 AILA lawyers and clients convened in our nation’s Capital to meet with Congressional representatives to discuss immigration reform. While we discussed a broad range of troublesome issues affecting immigrants, the predominating issue that recurrently emerged concerned the prospects for passage of CIR. Through this Newsletter, I would like to share with you the insights that we gleaned from inside the Beltway. Timing of Comprehensive Immigration Reform (CIR) The recurrent message from our legislators was that if CIR is to happen, it has to be enacted this year. If it does not pass this year, it will not happen during next year’s mid-term election. This means that if the present window for passage is lost, CIR will not come up again until 2011. We also were told that CIR will only come after health care reform. We anticipate seeing health care discussed in August after Congress reconvenes, which means that CIR may very well come up for Congressional debate sometime around October 2009. At this point, you may be wondering how? Well, there are a number of factors that indicate that CIR is a real possibility in the coming year. First, even though the economic crisis has taken center stage of late, polls continue to indicate that the general public views immigration reform as a high priority. The Congressional races confirmed that Americans want immigration reform: pro-immigration-reform candidates were elected over enforcement-only candidates in 20 key races. Moreover, the composition of the general electorate continues to change and Latinos are becoming a growing percentage of the votes. These factors all support that Americans believe our immigration system is broken and want comprehensive reform. Second, the Obama Administration continues to demonstrate that immigration is a top issue. The appointment of Janet Napolitano to the head of the Department of Homeland Security is telling because in addition to her experience with border security issues, she has a clearly stated position in support of CIR. Equally important, we are currently witnessing an increasingly complex and troublesome relationship with Mexico, and unquestionably, our broken system of immigration is a major problem not only for U.S.-Mexican relations, but also for the economic and social vitality of the Sunbelt states. President Obama is having his first meeting in Mexico with President Felipe Calderón of Mexico on April 16. Pay special attention to this meeting since we heard that President Obama may begin to reveal elements of his immigration plan. Third, the Hispanic Caucus in Congress continues to state that it will not support piecemeal immigration legislation; it is CIR or nothing. Because our system relies on disjointed laws, and because the Hispanic Caucus wields significant power in the current Congress, the threat of CIR or nothing is significant. Fourth, the Obama Administration and Congress appear committed to restoring the competitiveness and economic vitality of this country. Multiple studies confirm not only that a vibrant and sustainable immigration system contributes to our economic betterment, but in a tough, competitive global marketplace there is a real premium placed on access to the best talent – some of whom are foreign nationals. Understandably, there is real concern over the impact on the wage structure for U.S. workers if large numbers of foreign nationals gain legal status through a legalization program. But even here, the effects of such a program appear to be positive, according Dr. Raul Hinojosa-Ojeda, Executive Director, UCLA North American Integration and Development Center, who published a recent study entitled “Economic Stimulus through Legalization,” which shows that wages overall rise following a legalization program. Last but certainly not least, our experience was that even the anti-immigration Senators and Representatives who refused to meet with AILA members last year opened their doors to discuss immigration. This seems to suggest that some version of immigration reform may be inevitable, even for those who do not support it. To support this idea, we heard stories from other delegations that the strong anti-immigration camp knew that if CIR comes up, anti-immigration proponents will not win. Why CIR, Why now? You still may be wondering how? Undeniably, there is a palpable fatigue in Washington regarding immigration, partly due to the inundation last year by the very small, but vocal, anti-immigration advocate groups. Anti-immigrant phone calls outnumbered immigration support at least 10:1. In fact, anti-immigration spam faxes brought down phone lines in some Congressional offices. Despite the noise, many of the offices with whom we met understand that it is only a very noisy minority that opposes immigration reform. Despite the stigma in Washington regarding immigration, the two biggest factors making CIR a reality this year are: 1) the Obama administration must take the lead on CIR, and; 2) pro-immigration activists must resolve a serious public relations crisis. We heard that the Obama Administration feels that CIR is the best way to deal with immigration. The Administration feels that with CIR, Congress can take one hit and move on, rather than continue to fight many smaller immigration battles throughout the course of the term. No doubt, CIR will be a tough battle, which brings me to my second point. Immigration proponents need to reframe the conversation to reveal the human stories that are shaped by our laws. We face an organized anti-immigration lobby with deep pockets. In a time when it is easy to point to high unemployment, anti-immigration rhetoric is easier to promote. In fact, the anti-immigrant groups have already begun waging the fight in the media. Reshaping the conversation is a difficult battle but we all have fantastic stories of contributions immigrants make to our country, and these stories should remain a critical part of the conversation. What will CIR look like? At this point you may be wondering what CIR may look like? We expect there to be three main components: 1) increased emphasis on border security; 2) improvements on the legal ways immigrants can enter the United States; and 3) relief for the 12 million individuals who are currently in the United States illegally. Each of these components is critical to fundamentally improving our nation’s immigration system. We can expect compromises, which will probably include heightened border security and greater workplace enforcement efforts through the expansion of E-Verify, an electronic program used to confirm employment eligibility of all workers. In short, CIR requires a balancing act: expand the legal means for immigrants to come and remain in the United States + appropriately address illegal immigration + increase efforts to enforce legal immigration. If we ignore any of these elements, our immigration system will remain broken and untenable in the long run. The Assault on H-1B Another interesting development to watch is the recent assault on the H-1B category lead by Senator Sanders (I-VT), Senator Durbin (D-IL) and Senator Grassley (R-IA). Most visible is the provision in the economic stimulus bill, introduced by Senator Sanders and Senator Grassley that limits certain banks and other financial institutions from hiring H-1B workers without fulfilling additional and onerous labor market attestations. Senator Durbin and Senator Grassley are also suggesting the imposition of the H-1B dependency regulations on all H-1B Petitions, which would fundamentally change the nature of the category by requiring recruitment supervised by the Department of Labor for all H-1B jobs. They have also proposed significant increases in H-1B filing fees. Given that foreign students comprise over half of all science, technology, engineering and mathematics graduate students in American universities, H-1B status remains the primary way through which these professionals are able to work in the U.S. If our laws make it impossible for these highly trained professionals to work in the United States, they will go to countries that are more welcoming. The logical result is that if there are not enough U.S. students going into the fundamental academic disciplines required in the 21st Century, and the foreign students we are training leave, our country will eventually lose its competitive edge. AILA has recently created a taskforce to proactively fight against the recent attack on the H-1B category. Our firm, along with lawyers from across the country, will be providing success stories to this task force. To ensure credibility, we must frame the debate around the lives we are impacting and the benefits that immigrants continue to bring to our great nation. We welcome any thoughts or support you are willing to provide. What can you do? If you are an employer, call your elected officials. You can find your Senators online at: http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm. You can find your Representatives online at: http://www.house.gov/. Tell them of success stories and of the contributions your immigrant employees are making. Tell them of the hardships you would face if you were unable to retain your current immigrant employees. If you are a foreign national, call your Senators and Representatives. Tell them that you support immigration reform. If you can not find your elected officials, we are happy to help you identify the appropriate offices. Is CIR wise in such devastating economic times? In close, it is important to explore the wisdom of pushing for CIR in such bad economic times. Inevitably, we need laws that will facilitate our national goals of economic recovery and social betterment. The tendency is to preserve U.S. jobs through the elimination of foreign workers. However, countless studies suggest that immigration enhances U.S. competitiveness, contributes to job and capital formation, and adds to our economic vitality. Everyone basically agrees that our immigration system is broken. The real question then becomes the shape of immigration reform legislation rather than whether to leave our broken system unchanged. Given the importance of a healthy immigration system to a vibrant economic recovery in combination with the current composition of Congress and the Obama Administration, it appears that the support for CIR is alive. At no other time in recent history have immigration reform proponents had such strong support in both Congress and the White House. With an active pro-immigrant presence, we can help educate our elected officials to ensure that CIR legislation is fair, contributory to our nation’s social and economic welfare, and appropriately reflects the reality of the immigrant experience. As always, please feel free to distribute this Newsletter to other interested recipients and by all means, please bring any questions or comments to our attention. It is always a pleasure to hear from those whom we serve. Cordially, SARAH PETERSON STENSRUD, Esq. This memorandum is one of a series of communications prepared as a general public service to our clients and friends. The information herein presented is not intended nor should it be utilized as legal advice on any specific situation. Furthermore, given the rapid pace of change, the veracity of this information is constantly subject to modification and/or reversal. Rather, this piece represents a good faith attempt to orient clients and other interested parties served byAronson& Associates to current immigration developments. This piece in no manner supercedes the need to seek competent legal advice when engaged in activities carrying possible immigration-related consequences. |
Aronson & Associates,
P.A. |