Jump to content

Donald Trump a polityka imigracyjna. (Szczegolowy plan)


Guest

Recommended Posts

(przekopiowane z VJ)

 

President Trump’s Immigration Plans

Trump’s victory in the Presidential election is a tremendous political upset. The biggest issue raised by Trump was immigration—and he didn’t waiver from his restrictionist position. Although the polling data doesn’t show support for Trump’s position and the election was not a blowout, depending on whether he wins the popular vote (unclear at this time) he and other restrictionist Republicans will take this as a mandate to follow through on his immigration promises. 

Trump’s stump speeches were superficial but his immigration position paper was detailed and specific. Simply, it calls for a 20 percent to 60 percent cut in green cards and a huge increase in immigration enforcement. Here are the details from his immigration position paper fleshed out:

  1. Border wall. The completion of a border wall or at least 1000 miles of it (there are about 700 miles of walls and barriers currently). This wall could be virtual but he sold it as a physical barrier. His border wall is meant to address illegal border crossings that began subsiding a decade ago and are now near their post-1970 historical low point. There is a perception of chaos on the border that doesn’t reflect reality, but perception is all that matters in politics. The best way to further reduce unlawful immigration would be to create a low-skilled guest worker visa program or expand the existing ones, but Trump’s position paper precludes such a policy option.
  2. Nationwide E-Verify. Mandated nationwide E-Verify for all new hires in the United States as a means to exclude illegal immigrants from employment. E-Verify is an electronic eligibility for employment verification that checks a new hire’s identity information against government databases to approve or deny them employment. My colleague Jim Harper and I published a policy paper last year detailing all of the problems this system poses from economic, privacy, civil liberties, and effectiveness standpoints. E-Verify will add to the more than 13.48 man-hours spent by employers annually dealing with the I-9 form, unintentionally deny and delay many American workers legal employment due to inaccuracies, boost the black market in identity documents, and cost billions in taxpayer and economic costs to implement. E-Verfiy is also unenforced and ineffective at dimming the wage magnet in states where it is already mandated. E-Verify will fail to live up to its expectations and will be followed by calls for a national biometric identity card to seal gaps in the system.    
  3. End birthright citizenship. This would most likely require a constitutional amendment although Judge Richard Posner, noted legal scholar, thinks it can be changed by statute. Birthright citizenship is a lot older than the Fourteenth Amendment and has aided in the assimilation of generations of immigrantsin contrast to the experiences of assimilation in European nations without birthright citizenship. If implemented, jus sanguinis (citizenship through blood relations) would replace jus soli as the most important citizenship law of the land—an embrace of Carthaginian over Roman values.
  4. End DACA. President Obama’s executive action for unlawful immigrants brought here as children gave temporary work permits and relief from potential deportation (not a path to citizenship) to about 665,000 people. The continuation of this program depends on the actions of the President. Although this is not spelled out in his immigration position paper, it’s likely that Trump will decline to continue the program by stopping the periodic renewals required by law, thus opening up this population to deportation. Trump’s administration will also now have access to the identities of all the beneficiaries of DACA who had to submit their personal information to benefit, a source of information that could be used to more efficiently deport them. This has the potential to be a heart-wrenching humanitarian disaster for the DACA beneficiaries, their families, and those of us who count some of them as friends.  
  5. Mandatory detention. Detain all illegal immigrants apprehended while entering the United States. This policy is already partially implemented but could be greatly expanded. It would require new detention facilities similar to those used to detain Unauthorized Alien Children from Central America at serious economic and humanitarian cost
  6. Immigration moderation. Trump’s paper calls for a “pause” on the issuance of new green cards to workers abroad so that “employers will have to hire from the domestic pool of unemployed immigrant and native workers.” There were 151,596 employment-based green cards issued in 2014. 86 percent of them went to workers already in the United States on other visas. The other 14 percent went to workers abroad. The government also issued 645,560 family-based green cards in 2014, all of which allow recipients to work in the United States. 61 percent of these family-based green cards went to immigrants who were not in the country on another visa.  Depending on how you dice it, this provision could cut between about 140,000 and 540,000 green cards annually.
  7. Increase prevailing wage for H-1Bs. This policy proposal will reduce the number of legal skilled temporary migrant workers. Just over 124,000 H-1Bs were approved in 2014 for initial employment in the United States, with 85,000 of them for employment in firms and the rest in non-profit research institutions. These workers have an average salary of $75,000 so they do not compete with low-skilled America workers. If the minimum salary for H-1B visas was bumped up to $100,000 then the number of H-1Bs hired by private firms would decrease while they’d also shrink for research institutions. The 75th percentile for wage compensation for H-1B workers is $81,000. Even including all of the petitions for high wage workers that are rejected each year, this reform would significantly shrink the number of H-1B visas issued at an enormous economic cost. The H-1B system is also the feeder to the employment-based green card so any change here could disrupt future flows there even if no other changes are made. 
  8. Requirement to hire American workers first. This policy would increase the regulatory cost for American firms hiring skilled foreign workers in specialty occupations. Congress considered this policy for the H-1B visa in 1990 and rejected it because the regulatory costs would be so high. If Trump is the anti-regulation candidate he claims to be then he’ll reject this provision.
  9. Refugee program for American children. This policy would raise the standards for refugees and asylum seekers to cut down on supposed abuse and fraud. Assuming the worst case scenario, Trump’s policy proposal would decrease humanitarian immigration by 70 percent if trumped up fraud statistics are to be believed. That policy, if in place in 2016, would have cut the number of refugees by about 60,000 under the worst case scenario. 

The taxpayer cost of enforcing America’s immigration laws to the point where all illegal immigrants are removed and future flows stopped would be $419 to $619 billion over 20 years, according to estimates by the American Action Forum. These estimates do not include negative economic effects and lost tax revenue from a subsequently smaller economy. The Bipartisan Policy Center estimates that an attrition through enforcement policy would increase projected deficits by about $800 billion over the next 20 years. Those estimates don’t include the cost to the economy and government finances of slashing legal immigration.    

 

 

 

O dziwo, mnie sie ten plan podoba. Najwazniejsze, ze nie beda mieszac z wizami rodzinnymi. :):)

Tylko ci nielegalnie beda teraz trzasc portkami. :P

 

Edit:

Enhanced penalties for overstaying a visa. Millions of people come to theUnited States on temporary visas but refuse to leave, without consequence.

This isa threat to national security.Individuals who refuse to leave at the time their visaexpires should be subject to criminal penalties; this will also help give local

jurisdictions the power to hold visa overstays until federal authorities.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 185
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Interesujace kwestie to beda : 

- Co z DV ? Mam nadzieje ze to zlikwiduja jak najszybciej tyle ze pewnie jeszcze nie zaczaili ze cos takiego istnieje i nie jest zwiazane z zadnymi skillami tylko calkowicie losowe.

- Co z DACA bo poki co Ci ludzie to sa troche w prozni - z pol legalnego statusu ktory maja teraz jak DACA przestanie istniec stana sie znowu nielegalnymi

- Rodzinnych to chyba im ruszyc bedzie trudno, aczkolwiek tak liberalnej polityki to chyba (?) nie ma nikt. Ewidetnie malzonkowie musza byc w stanie emigrowac bo umozliwia to chyba kazdy cywilizowany kraj.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Probowalam znalezc cokolwiek na temat opini Trumpa o DV, ale niestety jeszcze sie nie wypowiedzial. Podejrzewam, ze zostanie zlikwidowana, ale zobaczymy. Jak cos znajde to edytuje pierwszy post. :P

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minuty temu, Roelka napisał:
  • Immigration moderation. Trump’s paper calls for a “pause” on the issuance of new green cards to workers abroad so that “employers will have to hire from the domestic pool of unemployed immigrant and native workers.” There were 151,596 employment-based green cards issued in 2014. 86 percent of them went to workers already in the United States on other visas. The other 14 percent went to workers abroad. The government also issued 645,560 family-based green cards in 2014, all of which allow recipients to work in the United States. 61 percent of these family-based green cards went to immigrants who were not in the country on another visa.  Depending on how you dice it, this provision could cut between about 140,000 and 540,000 green cards annually.
  • Increase prevailing wage for H-1Bs. This policy proposal will reduce the number of legal skilled temporary migrant workers. Just over 124,000 H-1Bs were approved in 2014 for initial employment in the United States, with 85,000 of them for employment in firms and the rest in non-profit research institutions. These workers have an average salary of $75,000 so they do not compete with low-skilled America workers. If the minimum salary for H-1B visas was bumped up to $100,000 then the number of H-1Bs hired by private firms would decrease while they’d also shrink for research institutions. The 75th percentile for wage compensation for H-1B workers is $81,000. Even including all of the petitions for high wage workers that are rejected each year, this reform would significantly shrink the number of H-1B visas issued at an enormous economic cost. The H-1B system is also the feeder to the employment-based green card so any change here could disrupt future flows there even if no other changes are made. 
 

Mnie interesuja te dwie kategorie (i nie zgodze sie z Roelka, ze to ma sens). Jak rozumiec, ze pierwszy paragraf, to do konca nie wiem. Nie beda wydawac GC ludziom poza USA czy rowniez w USA? 

Drugi punkt... Na uczelniach 9-month faculty zarabia przewaznie $60-85K za 9/10 miesiecy. Moga dorobic ale nie musza ok 30% pensji w lecie. To czesto daje im pensje powyzej 100K... Ten ruch bylby dosyc glupi, poniewaz USA inwestuje w ludzi, ktorzy potem musliby wyjechac z USA. Wielu doktorantow ma tuition waiver i pensje. Nie wiem jak wy, ale wolalbym, zeby USA z tego korzystalo. 

At tak na marginesie dobrze byc 12-month faculty. Problem odpada :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 godzin temu, kzielu napisał:

Interesujace kwestie to beda : 

- Co z DV ? Mam nadzieje ze to zlikwiduja jak najszybciej tyle ze pewnie jeszcze nie zaczaili ze cos takiego istnieje i nie jest zwiazane z zadnymi skillami tylko calkowicie losowe.

To przykre :( Widzisz, nie każdy jest takim jak Ty super specem i nie każdy ma zawód który pozwala na emigrację zawodową. Dlaczego odbierać ludziom jedyna możliwość emigracji, jaką jest DV? 

Oczywiście proces ten powinien być nieco zmodyfikowany - np wprowadzona drobna opłata za wysłanie zgłoszenia (niech by to było nawet 50$ ) co wyeliminuje wszystkich niezdecydowanych. Poza tym konieczność udowodnienia, że samemu będzie się utrzymywało w USA (nie oszczędności, bo te topnieją szybko, nie rodzina, ale konkretny, przekonujący plan na zdobycie zatrudnienia lub tez jego zdobycie) Plus np weryfikacja po pół albo po roku - czy dana osoba/rodzina zaaklimatyzowała się w USA, czy ma dochody, czy płaci podatki, czy i jak funkcjonuje w społeczeństwie, a w przypadku braku zatrudnienia, korzystania z pomocy socjalnej czy czegoś takiego - brak przedłużenia wylosowanej zielonej karty. 

Ja oczywiście z wiadomych względów nie chciałabym likwidacji loterii - mój zawód na pewno nie kwalifikuje mnie do emigracji (F/A na całym świecie jest sporo ;) ) wiek juz też raczej nie na przekwalifikowanie się. A na emigrację byłabym zdecydowana jak mało kto i wiem że bym sobie poradziła i nikomu ciężarem bym nie była... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minuty temu, Dragony napisał:

To przykre :( Widzisz, nie każdy jest takim jak Ty super specem i nie każdy ma zawód który pozwala na emigrację zawodową. Dlaczego odbierać ludziom jedyna możliwość emigracji, jaką jest DV? 

Oczywiście proces ten powinien być nieco zmodyfikowany - np wprowadzona drobna opłata za wysłanie zgłoszenia (niech by to było nawet 50$ ) co wyeliminuje wszystkich niezdecydowanych. Poza tym konieczność udowodnienia, że samemu będzie się utrzymywało w USA (nie oszczędności, bo te topnieją szybko, nie rodzina, ale konkretny, przekonujący plan na zdobycie zatrudnienia lub tez jego zdobycie) Plus np weryfikacja po pół albo po roku - czy dana osoba/rodzina zaaklimatyzowała się w USA, czy ma dochody, czy płaci podatki, czy i jak funkcjonuje w społeczeństwie, a w przypadku braku zatrudnienia, korzystania z pomocy socjalnej czy czegoś takiego - brak przedłużenia wylosowanej zielonej karty. 

Ja oczywiście z wiadomych względów nie chciałabym likwidacji loterii - mój zawód na pewno nie kwalifikuje mnie do emigracji (F/A na całym świecie jest sporo ;) ) wiek juz też raczej nie na przekwalifikowanie się. A na emigrację byłabym zdecydowana jak mało kto i wiem że bym sobie poradziła i nikomu ciężarem bym nie była... 

 

Jesli wezma sie za employment-based to nie ma nawet cienia watpliwosci, ze DV znajdzie sie na liscie, jako ze jest zrodlem imigrantow, ktorzy o prace beda konkurowac raczej z wyborcami Donalda niz Hilary. Twoj plan ma slaby punkt: wyegzekwowanie wyjazdu z USA jak ktos sobie nie radzi. Ja rozumiem takie indywidualne przypadki jak Twoj, ale prawda jest taka, ze logiki w DV nie ma. 

Pytanie tez brzmi jak sie wydluzy kolejka na EB-2, jak sie teraz wszyscy rzuca na petycje. Ciekawe czy w innych kategoriach czas oczekiwania sie wydluzy. Do tego dochodzi pytanie czy z uwagi na ilosc petycji niektore kraje powylatuja z loterii. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...