User:GodzillaAvenger/Fairness for High-Skilled Immigrants Act of 2019

The Fairness for High-Skilled Immigrants Act of 2019 (H.R.1044, S.386) is a proposed immigration reform bill introduced by Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) in the United States House of Representatives and Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) in the United States Senate. It was introduced on both chambers of the 116th United States Congress on February 2, 2019.

The bill seeks to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to eliminate the per-country numerical limitation for employment-based immigrants and to increase the per-country numerical limitation for family-sponsored immigrants. On July 10, 2019, the House passed the bill by a vote of 365-65.

Introduction
The Immigration Act of 1990 establishes five occupational categories (in the Immigration and Nationalities Act of 1965 only two existed). The act provided 140,000 immigrant visas per year for employment-based immigration and mandated that foreign nationals of no country shall receive more than 7% of the available visas in each category in any given year. However, this is not the case for the H-1B visa system. As such, Indian nationals that for years have received the majority of H-1B visas, have to wait decades before receiving a green card. Currently there are more than half a million people waiting in employment-based green card backlog.

Provisions and Amendments
The bill would, after a three-year transition period, remove the per-country caps for employment-based immigrant visas. It would also increase the per-country caps for family-sponsored immigrant visas from 7% to 15%.

An amendment introduced by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) enhances Department of Labor's oversight and enforcement ability of the H-1B visa program to combat H-1B fraud.

Changes introduced by Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) would allocate 5,000 immigrant visas in each of the next nine years since the enactment of the bill to occupations that are classified by the Department of Labor as Schedule A shortage occupations.

112th Congress
The bill was introduced in the House by Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) as H.R.3012 on September 22, 2011. It passed the House on November 29, 2011 by a vote of 389-15. It was introduced in the Senate by Sen. Lee as S.1857 on November 10, 2011. It was later introduced in the Senate again by Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) as S.1983 on December 13, 2011.

113th Congress
The bill was introduced in the House by Rep. Chaffetz as H.R.633 and in the Senate by Sen. Lee as S.293 on February 13, 2013.

114th Congress
The bill was introduced in the House by Rep. Chaffetz as H.R.213 on January 8, 2015, but was not introduced in the Senate.

115th Congress
The bill was introduced in the House by Rep. Chaffetz as H.R.392 on January 10, 2017. It was added as an amendment to Department of Homeland Security's appropriation bill by Rep. Kevin Yoder (R-KS). It was introduced in the Senate by Sen. Lee as S.281 on February 2, 2017.

116th Congress
The bill was introduced in the House by Rep. Lofgren as H.R.1044 on February 7, 2019. After garnering enough co-sponsors, it was put on the newly-created Consensus Calendar and passed the House on July 10, 2019 by a vote of 365-65. It was introduced in the Senate by Sen. Lee as S.386 on February 7, 2019. Three Unanimous Consent requests by Sen. Lee were blocked by Sen. Paul, Sen. David Purdue (R-GA), and Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL), respectively. Sen. Paul introduced the BELIEVE Act to solve the backlog problem, while Sen. Durbin introduced the RELIEF Act as a solution.

Viewpoints
The bill has been the subject of debate in many immigration circles. Below are some of the viewpoints of proponents and opponents of this legislation.

Viewpoint of proponents
Proponents of the bill argue that it would provide much-needed relief to Indian immigrants waiting for a green card who, under the current law, have to wait decades before receiving one. Others who favor the bill argue that the current system discriminates against some foreign workers based on their nationality. They contend that current law effectively ties backlogged immigrant workers to the employer that sponsors them for a green card for extended periods and can result in potential exploitation. Backlogged immigrant workers are barred from starting new businesses and those who consider leaving their employers face the prospect of forfeiting their pending employment-based immigrant petition. Furthermore, when their children reach the age of 21, they "age out" of the dependent status and either have to apply for a visa to stay in the U.S. or go back to their home country.

Many tech companies such as Apple, Amazon, and Salesforce, along with the Indian immigration advocacy group Immigration Voice have voiced support for this bill.

Viewpoint of opponents
Opponents of the bill argue that, as the bill does not increase the number of available green cards, it does not solve the backlog problem; it merely shifts the burden from immigrants of one country to all immigrants. They contend that under the current system, unused green cards in each category are given to immigrants from more populous countries like India and China, resulting in nationals of these countries receiving more than 7% of the available green cards each year. Therefore, they argue that the current backlog is not the result of per-country caps, but because demand for employment-based green cards has been much higher than their availability.

While estimates vary, they all show that even under the best circumstances, it would take at least 8 years to clear the current backlog in the second and third preference categories, and prospective immigrants, many with professional degrees, have to wait 8 years or more for a green card, which is even more than the current wait time for Chinese applicants. Opponents believe that this long wait time not only means all prospective immigrants have to deal with challenges facing people currently in the backlog (being tied to one employer, aging-out children, etc.), it also discourages skilled foreign workers seeking employment and immigration sponsorship in the United States. Aware of these circumstances, prospective immigrants may decide to start their careers and conduct entrepreneurial activities in other countries with a more robust immigration system. As a result, companies seeking highly-skilled foreign workers may face competitive disadvantage compared to those based in other countries. Some studies suggest that long waits for green cards affects the number of highly-trained students in STEM programs who remain in the United States to work after completing their studies. Because of this, many immigrantion advocates worry that this bill would decrease the flow of immigration. They note that people like Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR), who wrote the RAISE Act which would cut U.S. immigration by half, are a co-sponsor of this bill, hoping that a prolonged wait time would discourage prospective immigrants.

Opponents of the bill argue that it would monopolize the employment-based immigration system for the next decade, allocating all green cards to a few countries and one sector of the economy, at the risk of other countries and other sectors. They worry that doing so would substantially reduce country-of-origin diversity, which some studies show can reduce productivity and innovation. Opponents, along with Sen. Durbin, also criticize the bill because of not having a hearing in the nearly 8 years since it was introduced back in 2011. They argue that Sen. Lee, the principal sponsor of this legislation, has negotiated all amendments to the bill with other Republican Senators behind closed doors without any transparency in the process, and refuses to increase the number of available green cards as part of the bill.

Prominent immigration lawyers such as Ira J. Kurzban, immigration advocacy groups such as the Support Alliance of US Immigrants, and professional organizations such as IEEE and NAGPS have opposed this bill and backed Sen. Durbin's RELIEF Act.