comprehensive immigration reform - naco immigratio… · counties are often the health care...

The Senate’s Comprehensive Immigration Reform

Proposal (S. 744): Outlook for Counties

WWW.NACO.ORG | JUNE 2013

Comprehensive Immigration Reform

and the Outlook for Counties

WWW.NACO.ORG | FEBRUARY 2014

Why Immigration Reform Matters to Counties Presentation Overview

About NACo

Why Immigration Reform Matters to Counties

Immigration Reform in Context

Outlook for Reform Legislation

Key Provisions of the Senate Bill (S. 744)

WWW.NACO.ORG | FEBRUARY 2014 | 3

Why Immigration Reform Matters to Counties About NACo

The National Association of Counties

(NACo) is the only national

organization that represents county

governments in the United States.

Founded in 1935, NACo assists

America's 3,069 counties in pursuing

excellence in public service to produce

healthy, vibrant, safe and resilient

counties. NACo promotes sound public

policies, fosters county solutions and

innovation, promotes intergovernmental

and public-private collaboration, and

provides value-added services to save

counties and taxpayers money.

Healthy, vibrant, safe

and resilient counties

across America


Why Immigration Reform Matters to Counties Why Counties Matter

WW

W.N

AC

O.O

RG

| F

EBR

UA

RY

20

14

| 5

Why Immigration Reform Matters to Counties Why Immigration Reform

Matters to Counties

Counties are often the health care providers of last

resort for the uninsured and underinsured There are an estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants in the

U.S., roughly seven million of whom have no health insurance

Counties provide for the public safety of all

individuals, including undocumented immigrants Border counties are often involved in the apprehension and detention

of undocumented immigrants

Counties provide free elementary and secondary

education without regard to immigration status Immigration reform would increase demand for adult education, at a

time when states have reduced funding for such programs



Healthcare Education Public Safety

Counties must provide

emergency health care to all,

including undocumented

immigrants

Counties must provide

elementary and secondary

education to all, including

undocumented immigrants

Counties provide for the

public safety of all

individuals, including


Some counties provide health

care to immigrants who are

not yet eligible for federal

means-tested benefits

Counties spend more than

$60 billion per year on the

provision of education to

residents

2,865 of the nation’s 3,069

counties own jails or

participate in the operation of

regional jails

Counties operate 964

hospitals nationwide, and

spend roughly $68 billion

annually on health care

services for the public

Counties will be affected by

increased demand for

English language classes as


integrate into society

Counties rely on the State

Criminal Alien Assistance

Program for reimbursements

related to the incarceration of


Why Immigration Reform

Matters to Counties



Lawful Permanent

Residents (aged 18+)*

Lawful Permanent

Residents

(under 18)*

Lawful Permanent

Residents

(pregnant

women)*

Refugees,

Asylees,

Victims of

Trafficking,

Others**

Lawfully Present

Individuals***

Unauthorized Individuals

(including children and

pregnant women)

Affordable Care Act

subsidies, premium

tax credits and cost-

sharing reductions

Eligible Eligible Eligible Eligible Eligible Not Eligible

(also not eligible for full-

priced health insurance under

the exchanges)

Supplemental

Nutrition Assistance

Program (SNAP)

Not eligible until after 5 year

waiting period or credit for 40

quarters of work

Eligible Not eligible until

after 5 year waiting

period or credit 40

quarters of work

Eligible Not eligible Not eligible

Medicaid Not eligible

until after 5 year waiting

period

State option

to provide without 5

year waiting period ^

State option


year waiting period

Eligible State option

for children under 21

and pregnant women

Eligible only for emergency

Medicaid

Children’s Health

Insurance Program

(CHIP)

Not eligible


period

State option


year waiting period

State option


year waiting period

Eligible State option

for children under 21

and pregnant women

Not eligible

Temporary

Assistance for Needy

Families (TANF)

Not eligible


period

Not eligible


period

Not eligible

until after 5 year

waiting period

Eligible Not eligible Not eligible

Social Security’s

Supplemental

Security Income

Program (SSI)

Not eligible until after 5 year

waiting period and have credit

for 40 quarters of work or

meet another exception ^^

Not eligible until after 5

year waiting period and

have credit for 40

quarters of work or

meet another exception

Not eligible until

after 5 year waiting

period and have

credit for 40

quarters of work

Only eligible

during first 7

years after

status is

granted

Not eligible Not eligible

Chart Notes * If the individual entered the

U.S. on or after 8/22/1996

** Includes individuals

granted withholding of

deportation or removal

*** Includes groups

granted Temporary

Protected Status

^ Eligible regardless

of state option if

receiving federal foster care

^^ A quarter of work is

equivalent to three months

of employment

Immigrants are Eligible for Some Means-Tested Programs under Current Law


Matters to Counties

Source: National Immigration Law Center WWW.NACO.ORG | FEBRUARY 2014 | 8


Some States Extend Medicaid/CHIP to

New Immigrant Children & Pregnant Women


Matters to Counties

Source: Urban Institute WWW.NACO.ORG | FEBRUARY 2014 | 9

Why Immigration Reform Matters to Counties Why Immigration Reform

Matters to Counties

Source: Migration Policy Institute, May 2013

Share of Undocumented Adults Age 19 and Older Without Health Insurance,

by State of Residence, 2011

Note: states that are not shaded had samples that

were too small to support reliable insurance

coverage estimates. WWW.NACO.ORG | FEBRUARY 2014 | 10


The Foreign Born Population in the United States

Continues to Increase


Source: Congressional Budget Office WWW.NACO.ORG | FEBRUARY 2014 | 12


Share of States’ Population that is Foreign-Born, 2012

20% and Higher 14% to 20% 9% to 14% Less than 9%




States with the Highest Concentration of Foreign-Born Populations


Source: Pew Hispanic Center

California

10.2 Million

27.1%

New York

4.3 Million

22.2% New Jersey

1.9 Million

21.3%

Texas

4.2 Million

16.5%

Florida

3.7 Million

19.4%

Number of Immigrants and Percentage of State Population



Number of Undocumented Immigrants in the

United States, by Birthplace, 2000 and 2011


2011

2000

Mexico

El Salvador,

Guatemala,

and Honduras Other

Countries

Total

8.5

Total

11.5 6.8 1.6 3.2

4.7 0.9 2.9

Millions



Country of Birth of the Undocumented Immigrant Population


Source: U.S. Department of Homeland Security WWW.NACO.ORG | FEBRUARY 2014 | 16


States of Residence of the Undocumented Immigrant Population




Age Range of the Undocumented Immigrant Population




The Share of Minorities among the Voting Population is Increasing


Source: National Journal WWW.NACO.ORG | FEBRUARY 2014 | 19


Recent polls show that a

large majority of

Americans support

immigration reform that

would give legal status to

undocumented

immigrants. This poll,

conducted by the Pew

Research Center, shows

that 73 percent of those

surveyed felt that

undocumented

immigrants should be

given some path to legal

status.

Undocumented immigrants

should have some way to

stay in the U.S. legally

73%

Should have a path to citizenship

Should have a path to

permanent residency only

Don’t know which path 4%

Should not be allowed to stay

legally

Don’t know 4%


Source: Pew Research Center, via National Journal WWW.NACO.ORG | FEBRUARY 2014 | 20

Why Immigration Reform Matters to Counties Outlook for Reform Legislation

Past Immigration Proposals



Timing of Immigration Reform is Uncertain

With large populations of undocumented immigrants and foreign-born voters who

consider immigration reform a major priority in the U.S., there is growing pressure on

Congressional leadership to enact reform during the 113th Congress

The Senate passed its version of a comprehensive measure (S. 744) on June 27 in a 68-

32 vote

The House has passed five incremental measures (slide 26), and House Speaker John

Boehner (R-Ohio) has released principles for reform that encompass those measures

and would add a path to legalization for undocumented individuals and a path to

citizenship for individuals who were brought into the country as children

A comprehensive measure (H.R. 15) largely based on S. 744 has been introduced in the

House and has 194 cosponsors, including three Republicans

If and when both chambers pass reform legislation, a Senate and House conference will

be held to reconcile the differences between the bills




Status of Current Immigration Reform Proposals

Proposal or Legislation Sponsors Status

White House

Immigration Reform Proposal President Obama

• A draft of the president’s immigration

reform proposal was leaked to the

press Feb. 16, 2013

• Unlikely to become a bill unless

Congress becomes gridlocked

Senate Measure:

Border Security, Economic Opportunity,

and Immigration Modernization Act of

2013 (S. 744)

“Senate Gang of Eight”

Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.)

Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.)

Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.)

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.)

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.)

Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.)

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.)

Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.)

• Introduced on April 17, 2013

• On May 21, 2013, the Senate

Judiciary Committee voted to move

legislation onto Senate floor for

consideration

• Passed on June 27, 2013 by a 68-32

vote

House Immigration Reform Proposal Unknown at this time

• It was reported on May 16, 2013 that

key House Members have reached an

agreement on comprehensive reform

principles, but few details are

available. The House Judiciary

Committee has approved four

incremental measures

Source: National Journal




Incremental House Immigration Reform Legislation Should House negotiators fail to reach a compromise on a comprehensive immigration reform proposal,

the House Republican leadership may move a series of smaller bills instead; some have already been

approved by the House Judiciary Committee:

Legislation Sponsor(s) Summary NACo Policy

Legal Workforce Act

(H.R. 1772)

Approved by House Judiciary

Committee on June 26, 2013

Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas)

Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.)

Mandates that local and state governments

verify the immigration status of current

employees who have not gone through the E-

Verify system; mandates implementation

of E-Verify within 12-24 months

NACo opposes unfunded

mandates imposed on state and

local governments, and has

voiced its opposition to similar E-

Verify bills in the past

SKILLS Visa Act

(H.R. 2131)



Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.)


Increases H-1B employment visas to 155,000

a year, from the current level of 65,000

NACo does not have policy on

the numerical caps for H-1B

employment visas

The Agricultural Guest Worker Act

(H.R. 1773)




Establishes a new H-2C visa program for all

aspects of the agriculture industry; initial

length of stay of 18 months for seasonal

workers and 36 months for permanent

workers; no path to citizenship


this particular bill, but in general

supports the establishment of an

orderly temporary worker

program

Strengthen and Fortify Enforcement

Act (SAFE)

(H.R. 2278)



Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.)

Compels state and local government to

enforce all immigration laws by changing

unlawful presence from a civil to a criminal

violation

NACo opposes unfunded

mandates requiring that counties

enforce civil immigration laws

such as those included in H.R.

2278

Border Security Results Act

(H.R. 1417)

Approved by House Homeland

Security Committee on May 15, 2013

Rep. Michael McCaul (R-

Texas)

Requires the Department of Homeland

Security to develop a plan for a verifiable 90%

apprehension rate on the southwest border

within 5 years


this particular bill




Committees with Jurisdiction over Immigration Reform

House Committee on the Judiciary Senate Committee on the Judiciary

Majority

Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.), Chairman

Trent Franks (R-Ariz.)

Howard Coble (R-N.C.)

Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.)

Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.)

Spencer Bachus (R-Ala.)

Lamar Smith (R-Texas)

Steve Chabot (R-Ohio)

Darrell Issa (R-Calif.)

J. Randy Forbes (R-Va.)

Steve King (R-Iowa)

Louie Gohmert (R-Texas)

Jim Jordan (R-Ohio)

Ted Poe (R-Texas)

Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah)

Tom Marino (R-Pa.)

Mark Amodei (R-Nev.)

Raul R. Labrador (R-Idaho)

Blake Farenthold (R-Texas)

George Holding (R-N.C.)

Doug Collins (R-Ga.)

Ron DeSantis (R-Fla.)

Minority

John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.)

Ranking Member

Jerrod Nadler (D-N.Y.)

Robert C. Scott (D-Va.)

Melvin Watt (D-N.C.)

Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.)

Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-Texas)

Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.)

Hank Johnson (D-Ga.)

Pedro Pierluisi (D-P.R.)

Judy Chu (D-Calif.)

Ted Deutch (D-Fla.)

Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.)

Karen Bass (D-Calif.)

Cedric Richmond (D-La.)

Suzan DelBene (D-Wash).

Joe Garcia (D-Fla.)

Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.)

Majority

Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Chairman

Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)

Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.)

Dick Durbin (D-Ill.)

Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.)

Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.)

Al Franken (D-Minn.)

Chris Coons (D-Del.)

Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.)

Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii)

Minority

Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa)

Ranking Member

Orrin Hatch (R-Utah)

Jeff Sessions (R-Ark.)

Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.)

John Cornyn (R-Texas)

Mike Lee (R-Utah)

Ted Cruz (R-Texas)

Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.)




Key Provisions of the U.S. Senate’s

Comprehensive Immigration

Reform Bill (S. 744)


Why Immigration Reform Matters to Counties Key Provisions of S. 744

Enhanced border security initiatives

Securing the border would serve as a prerequisite to the path to

citizenship for undocumented immigrants

Earned pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants who

meet eligibility requirements

Major reforms to legal immigration and family and employment visa

programs

Allocation of over $8 billion in fees and penalties generated from the

bill to deficit reduction

The fees and penalties would be paid by undocumented immigrants as

they move through the path to citizenship

Major Themes in the Senate’s Immigration Reform Proposal


$20M

$50M

$80M

$80M

$250M

$250M

$250M

$500M

$500M

$500M

$1B

$1B

$6.5B

Establish Bureau of Immigration and Labor Market Research

Fund Office of Citizenship and New Americans

Finance campaigns to introduce and explain employment…

Protect against discrimination based on citizenship status

Increase border crossing prosecutions

Enhance law enforcement preparedness along borders

Fund states that share driver's license information for…

Fund organizations providing legal assistance to immigrants

Fund programs supporting immigrant integration

Reimburse carrier implementation of identity-theft resistent…

Limit expenses related to increasing integrity of Social…

Support enforcement of employment verification system

Increase border security


Funding Allocations in the Senate Immigration Reform Bill



Breakdown of Funding for Border Security Initiatives in S. 744



Enforcement of Border and Ports of Entry

NACo Policy S. 744 President’s Proposal

• NACo supports the

enhancement of U.S. border

security

• Before previously undocumented immigrants can

adjust to legal permanent resident status, border

enforcement initiatives must be completed, and the E-

Verify and entry-exit tracking systems must be in

place

• Would mandate 24-hour surveillance of the southwest

border, including unmanned aircraft, upgrades to

helicopter fleets and mobile communications systems

• Would call for an entry-exit tracking system to

determine whether persons entering on temporary

visas have left the country as required

• Adds 20,000 border patrol agents to the southern

border

• Would call for the improvement

of infrastructure at ports of entry

and for technology to control

land and maritime borders

Key Provisions of S. 744



Enforcement of Border and Ports of Entry, cont.

NACo Policy S. 744 President’s

Proposal

• NACo opposes

unfunded mandates

that would require

counties to enforce

civil immigration laws

• No unfunded mandates that require counties to enforce civil immigration laws

• Would provide funding to federal, state and local law enforcement in the

southwest border to purchase and upgrade communications systems

• Would also establish a southwest border prosecution initiative to reimburse

state, county, tribal and municipal governments for prosecution and pre-trial

detention costs of federally initiated cases declined by local U.S. Attorneys’

Offices

• Would provide $30 million a year for Operation Stonegarden, which provides

grants to southwestern states for costs related to illegal immigration and drug

smuggling

• No unfunded

mandates that

require counties to

enforce civil

immigration laws

• Would provide

additional funding for

tribal governments

along the southwest

border

• NACo supports the

full funding of the

State Criminal Alien

Assistance Program

(SCAAP), which is

currently funded at

only $240 million

• Would reauthorize SCAAP through FY2015 at a level of $950 million per year

• Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-Calif.) sponsored an amendment to S.744 that

would allow reimbursements under SCAAP for the incarceration of

individuals who have not been convicted of a crime, and would continue

reimbursements for “unknown” individuals – those who do not appear in

the Department of Homeland Security database because they have not

previously come in contact with federal immigration authorities. The

amendment, which NACo supported, was adopted by voice vote

• The President’s

FY2014 budget

request proposes to

eliminate SCAAP




Enforcement Task Forces and Community Liaisons


• NACo supports the inclusion of

county elected officials in all

relevant task forces and

commissions

• Would establish a 10-member Southwest Border

Commission of governors, attorneys general and

community leaders

• Would establish a 26-member Homeland

Security Border Oversight Task Force appointed

by the president, comprised of 11 members from

the northern border region and 15 from the

southern border region; includes local

government elected officials

• Would call for the U.S.

Department of Homeland Security

to establish community liaisons

along the northern and southern

borders




Workplace Enforcement: E-Verify


• NACo is concerned about the

costs of implementing the E-Verify

system for current employees,

especially if the public sector is

required to implement the

program sooner than the private

sector (most counties have

already implemented E-Verify for

new hires)

• Would mandate E-Verify system for new hires,

but not for current workers

• Would mandate E-Verify for the public and

private sectors

• Employers with more than 5,000 employers

would be given two years to implement the

system; those with more than 500 employees

would be given three years; agricultural

employers would be given four years

• Would prohibit national ID cards and list

documents, such as driver’s licenses, that can be

used to meet REAL ID Act requirements

• Would provide $250 million in grants to states

that voluntarily submit state driver’s license

photos to the E-Verify system

• Would call for the phase-in of a

mandatory, electronic verification

system over five years, as well as

increasing penalties for hiring

unauthorized workers




Pathway to Citizenship for Undocumented Immigrants


• NACo supports an earned path

to citizenship for

undocumented immigrants that

includes registration

requirements, English and

civic competency, payment of

outstanding taxes and fines,

and criminal background

checks

• NACo recognizes that some

counties and states will be

affected by the fact that S. 744

would consider individuals on

its path to citizenship to be

“lawfully present”

• Would create a path to citizenship for

undocumented immigrants who were physically

present in the U.S. on or before December 31,

2011, and are not disqualified due to criminal

backgrounds or other categories of inadmissibility

• Would require eligible undocumented immigrants

to come forward, register, and pay outstanding

taxes and fees

• Would first grant Registered Provisional Immigrant

(RPI) status to undocumented immigrants,

followed by Legal Permanent Resident (LPR)

status, and finally citizenship; reaching citizenship

would take 13-15 years for most undocumented

immigrants

• Undocumented immigrants on the path to

citizenship would be considered “lawfully present”

for purposes other than those related to the

Affordable Care Act

• Would create a provisional legal

status for undocumented

immigrants, ultimately leading to

LPR status and citizenship




Requirements for Registered Provisional Immigrant (RPI) Status Under the Senate’s comprehensive reform proposal, RPI status is the first step on the

path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, followed by Legal Permanent

Resident (LPR) status, and citizenship, respectively


• NACo supports

requirements similar

to those included in

S. 744 for RPI status

• Would require the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland

Security to certify that border security measures required under

the bill have begun, as a “trigger” to RPI status adjustments

• Undocumented immigrants who were physically present in the

U.S. on or before December 31, 2011 would be eligible for RPI

status

• Individuals with serious criminal backgrounds or who pose a

threat to national security would not be eligible for RPI status

• Eligible applicants would be required to pay assessed taxes and

application fees

• RPI status would initially last for six years, but would be

renewable as long as the individual has not become ineligible

during that time; there is a $500 fee for initial application, and

another $500 fee for renewal

• Undocumented immigrants

wishing to adjust to

provisional status would be

required to come forward,

register, pass background

checks, and pay fees and

penalties




Requirements for Legal Permanent Resident (LPR) Status


• NACo recognizes that counties

will be affected by requirements

for Legal Permanent Resident

(LPR) status that call for

English and civics competency

• Would require the Secretary of the U.S. Department

of Homeland Security to certify that border security

measures required under the bill are “substantially

operational,” as a “trigger” to adjustment of RPI to

LPR status

• Most individuals in RPI status would be required to

wait 10 years before adjusting to Legal Permanent

Resident (LPR) status

• Individuals in RPI status would be required to pass

additional background checks, to demonstrate

English and civics competency, and to show a

history of employment in the U.S.

• Immigrants in RPI status would pay a $1,000 fee

when applying for LPR status; this is in addition to

the two $500 fees paid during RPI status

• Most individuals who achieve RPI, and then LPR

status, would be eligible to apply for citizenship

after three years as LPRs

• Immigrants in provisional status

would have to pass additional

background checks, demonstrate

English and civics competency,

and register for Selective Service

(“the draft”), where applicable

• As under current law, immigrants

who achieve LPR status would be

eligible to apply for citizenship

after five years




Expedited Paths to Citizenship


• NACo supports policies that

provide expedited paths to

citizenship for individuals who

were brought to the U.S. as

minors, and for agricultural

workers

• Undocumented immigrants who came to the U.S.

as children (commonly referred to as DREAMers),

and those who have been working in the

agricultural industry without authorization, would

have an expedited path to Legal Permanent

Residency and citizenship

• DREAMers would be able to adjust to LPR status

after five years in RPI status, and to apply for

citizenship immediately after receiving LPR status;

DREAMers are also exempt from the $1,000 fee

for adjustment from RPI to LPR status

• Agricultural workers who worked 575 hours or 100

days during the two year period prior to December

31, 2012 would be eligible to apply, along with

their dependents, for a “blue card,” which would in

turn allow them to apply for LPR status after five

years as “blue card” holders

• Individuals who were brought to

the country as children would

have an expedited path to

citizenship; the proposal is silent

on expedited paths for agricultural

workers




Federal Benefit Programs


• NACo supports grants to states

and counties for health and

education, funded by fees

established in immigration reform

legislation, and is working with

members of Congress to

establish such grants

• NACo has a long-standing policy

supporting the elimination of the

five-year waiting period for

access to means-tested services

by legal permanent residents

• Current restrictions against receiving means-tested

services such as Medicaid (except in cases of

emergency) would continue

• Individuals in RPI status would not be eligible for

Affordable Care Act tax credits or subsidies, but

would be exempt from its individual mandates

• There would be no change to the current five-year

waiting period faced by Legal Permanent

Residents for means-tested services

• Would address state and county foster care plans

for citizen children whose parents are in removal

proceedings

• Current restrictions against

receiving means-tested services

such as Medicaid (except in cases

of emergency) would continue

• Individuals in provisional status

would be prohibited from receiving

subsidies or tax credits under the

Affordable Care Act

• There would be no change to the

five-year waiting period for access

to means-tested services by legal

permanent residents




Reforming Legal Immigration - Changes to Visa Programs


• NACo does not have policy on

family visa categories or

methods of reducing the

employment visa backlogs, but

generally supports the

streamlining of the immigration

system

• Would create a Merit Based Visa System, which

would award points to applicants based on a number

of factors, including education and employment

history, and would grant between 120,000 and

250,000 immigrant visas per year, depending on the

U.S. unemployment rate

• Would eliminate the Diversity Visa program, which

currently awards 50,000 immigrant visas per year to

individuals from underrepresented countries

• The numerical limit on visas issued to spouses and

minor children of LPRs would be eliminated

• Family-based immigrant visas for siblings of U.S.

citizens and for married children of U.S. citizens who

are 30 or older would be eliminated, but such siblings

and married children would receive a point boost in

the Merit Based Visa system

• The bill would create a new nonimmigrant “V” visa for

beneficiaries of family visa petitions to live and work

in the U.S. while waiting for their immigrant visas to

be approved

• The proposal would temporarily

increase annual visa numbers,

and would recapture unused

visas to eliminate visa backlogs




Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) Visas


• NACo supports the STEM visa

program

• Individuals who earn a Master’s or other

postgraduate degree in STEM fields from

American universities would be eligible to apply

for Legal Permanent Resident status, and

thereafter, citizenship

• Spouses and minor children of such individuals

would also be eligible to apply for Legal

Permanent Resident Status

• Individuals who earn a Master’s

or other postgraduate degree in

STEM fields from American

universities would be eligible to

apply for Legal Permanent

Resident status, and thereafter,

citizenship




New Work Visas and Economic Development Visa Changes


• NACo supports a temporary

worker visa program

• NACO supports the Job

Opportunities through Launching

Tourism Act (JOLT)

• Would establish a workable program to meet the

needs of the agricultural industry that covers all

aspects of the industry, not just seasonal workers

• Would establish a new W-visa program that would

allow more low-skilled immigrants to enter the

U.S. when the economy is creating jobs, and less

when the economy is not creating jobs

• Would create a new category of visas for

investors

• Would make changes to JOLT, designed to attract

more tourism

• Would create new visa categories

for highly-skilled immigrants

• Would create a new start-up

investor visa category, with

incentives for those who invest in

rural and economically depressed

areas



For more legislative presentations,

visit www.naco.org

For questions or more information, feel free to contact us

Contact Us!

Paul Beddoe: Health, Deputy Legislative Director [email protected] or 202.942.4234 Michael Belarmino: Finance & Intergovernmental Affairs [email protected] or 202.942.4254 Daria Daniel: Community and Economic Development [email protected] or 202.942.4212 Yejin Jang: Telecommunications and Technology, DHS/FEMA [email protected] or 202.942.4239 Jessica Monahan: Transportation [email protected] or 202.942.4217

Arlandis Rush: Justice, Public and Safety [email protected] or 202.942.4236 Marilina Sanz: Human Services and Education [email protected] or 202.942.4260 Arthur Scott: Agriculture and Rural Affairs [email protected] or 202.942.4230 Hadi Sedigh: Workforce and Pensions [email protected] or 202.942.4213 Julie Ufner: Environment, Energy & Land Use [email protected] or 202.942.4269

Matthew Chase, NACo Executive Director

NACo was named one of nine remarkable associations in the United States after a four-year study conducted by the American Society of Association Executives

and The Center for Association Leadership because of its commitment to members and purpose

Questions?

Deborah Cox: Legislative Director [email protected] or 202.942.4286

comprehensive immigration reform - naco immigratio… · counties are often the health care...

Documents