Thursday, May 17, 2007
Tweet[IWS] CRS: U.S. IMMIGRATION POLICY ON PERMANENT ADMISSIONS [Updated 11 May 2007]
IWS Documented News Service
_______________________________
Institute for Workplace Studies----------------- Professor Samuel B. Bacharach
School of Industrial & Labor Relations-------- Director, Institute for Workplace Studies
Cornell University
16 East 34th Street, 4th floor---------------------- Stuart Basefsky
New York, NY 10016 -------------------------------Director, IWS News Bureau
________________________________________________________________________
Congressional Research Service (CRS)
Order Code RL32235
U.S. Immigration Policy on Permanent Admissions
Updated May 11, 2007
Ruth Ellen Wasem, Specialist in Immigration Policy, Domestic Social Policy Division
http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/84914.pdf
[full-text, 38 pages]
Summary
When President George W. Bush announced his principles for immigration
reform in January 2004, he included an increase in permanent immigration as a key
component. President Bush has stated that immigration reform is a top priority of his
second term and has prompted a lively debate on the issue. Of an array of bills to
revise permanent admissions introduced, only one was enacted in the 109th Congress:
A provision in P.L. 109-13 (H.R. 1268, the emergency FY2005 supplemental
appropriation) makes up to 50,000 employment-based visas available for foreign
nationals coming to work as medical professionals. There is a widely held
expectation that the 110th Congress will consider immigration reform.
During the 109th Congress, the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act (S.
2611) would have substantially increased legal immigration and would have
restructured the allocation of these visas. S. 2611 would have doubled the number of
family-based and employment-based immigrants admitted over the next decade, as
well as expanded the categories of immigrants who may come without numerical
limits. The Senate passed S. 2611 on May 25, 2006. The major House-passed
immigration bill (H.R. 4437) did not revise family-based and employment-based
immigration. Proposals to alter permanent admissions were included in several other
immigration proposals (S. 1033/H.R. 2330, S. 1438, H.R. 3700, H.R. 3938, S. 1919).
Thus far in the 110th Congress, H.R. 75, H.R. 938, H.R. 1645, and S. 1348 would
revise categories for permanent admissions.
Four major principles underlie current U.S. policy on permanent immigration:
the reunification of families, the admission of immigrants with needed skills, the
protection of refugees, and the diversity of admissions by country of origin. These
principles are embodied in the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). The INA
specifies a complex set of numerical limits and preference categories that give
priorities for permanent immigration reflecting these principles. Legal permanent
residents (LPRs) refer to foreign nationals who live lawfully and permanently in the
United States.
During FY2005, a total of 1,122,373 aliens became LPRs in the United States.
Of this total, 57.8% entered on the basis of family ties. Additional major immigrant
groups in FY2005 were employment-based preference immigrants (including spouses
and children) at 22.0%, and refugees and asylees adjusting to immigrant status at
12.7%. Mexico led all countries with 161,445 aliens who became LPRs in FY2005.
India followed at a distant second with 84,681 LPRs. China came in third with
69,967. These three countries comprise 30% of all LPRs in FY2005.
Significant backlogs are due to the sheer volume of aliens eligible to immigrate
to the United States. Citizens and LPRs first file petitions for their relatives. After
the petitions are processed, these relatives then wait for a visa to become available
through the numerically limited categories. The siblings of U.S. citizens are waiting
11 years. Prospective LPRs from the Philippines have the most substantial waiting
times; consular officers are now considering the petitions of the brothers and sisters
of U.S. citizens from the Philippines who filed more than 22 years ago.
Contents
Latest Legislative Developments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Current Law and Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Worldwide Immigration Levels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Per-Country Ceilings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Other Permanent Immigration Categories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Admissions Trends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Immigration Patterns, 1900-2005 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
FY2005 Admissions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Backlogs and Waiting Times . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Visa Processing Dates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Petition Processing Backlogs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Recent Legislative History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Issues in the 108th Congress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Legislation Passed in the 109th Congress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Recaptured Visa Numbers for Nurses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Recaptured Employment-Based Visa Numbers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
USCIS Funding Trends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
FY2006 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
FY2007 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Major Issues in the 109th Congress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
President Bush's Immigration Reform Proposal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Securing America's Borders Act (S. 2454)/Chairman's Mark . . . . . . 19
Comprehensive Immigration Reform (S. 2611) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Secure America and Orderly Immigration Act (S. 1033/H.R. 2330) . . 23
Comprehensive Enforcement and Immigration Reform Act of 2005 . 23
Immigration Accountability Act of 2005 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Enforcement First Immigration Reform Act of 2005 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Additional Immigration Reduction Legislation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Permanent Partners . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Legislation in the 110th Congress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Key Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Balancing the Priorities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Broader Issues of Debate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Preference System versus Point System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Comprehensive Immigration Reform Legislation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
STRIVE (H.R. 1645) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Immigration Control and Reform Legislation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Nuclear Family Priority Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
USCIS Funding and Backlogs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
FY2008 Funding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Backlog Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
List of Figures
Figure 1. Annual Immigration Admissions and Status Adjustments, 1990-2005 . . . . . . . . . . 7
Figure 2. Legal Permanent Residents: New Arrivals and Adjustments of Status, FY1995-FY2005 . . . . . . . 8
Figure 3. Top Sending Countries (Comprising More Than Half of All LPRs): Selected Periods . . . . 9
Figure 4. Legal Immigrants by Major Category, FY2005 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Figure 5. Top Twelve Immigrant-Sending Countries, FY2005 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Figure 6. Projected Flow of LPRs under S. 2611, FY2007-FY2009 . . . . . . . . . . 21
List of Tables
Table 1. Legal Immigration Preference System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Table 2. Other Major Legal Immigration Categories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Table 3. FY2005 Immigrants by Category . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Table 4. Priority Dates for Family Preference Visas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Table 5. Priority Dates for Employment Preference Visas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Appendix A. Top Fifty Sending Countries in FY2005 by Category of LPR . . . 31
Appendix B. Processing Dates for Immigrant Petitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Appendix C. FY2005 Immigrants by Preference Category . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
______________________________
This information is provided to subscribers, friends, faculty, students and alumni of the School of Industrial & Labor Relations (ILR). It is a service of the Institute for Workplace Studies (IWS) in New York City. Stuart Basefsky is responsible for the selection of the contents which is intended to keep researchers, companies, workers, and governments aware of the latest information related to ILR disciplines as it becomes available for the purposes of research, understanding and debate. The content does not reflect the opinions or positions of Cornell University, the School of Industrial & Labor Relations, or that of Mr. Basefsky and should not be construed as such. The service is unique in that it provides the original source documentation, via links, behind the news and research of the day. Use of the information provided is unrestricted. However, it is requested that users acknowledge that the information was found via the IWS Documented News Service.
Stuart Basefsky
Director, IWS News Bureau
Institute for Workplace Studies
Cornell/ILR School
16 E. 34th Street, 4th Floor
New York, NY 10016
Telephone: (607) 255-2703
Fax: (607) 255-9641
E-mail: smb6@cornell.edu
****************************************
_______________________________
Institute for Workplace Studies----------------- Professor Samuel B. Bacharach
School of Industrial & Labor Relations-------- Director, Institute for Workplace Studies
Cornell University
16 East 34th Street, 4th floor---------------------- Stuart Basefsky
New York, NY 10016 -------------------------------Director, IWS News Bureau
________________________________________________________________________
Congressional Research Service (CRS)
Order Code RL32235
U.S. Immigration Policy on Permanent Admissions
Updated May 11, 2007
Ruth Ellen Wasem, Specialist in Immigration Policy, Domestic Social Policy Division
http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/84914.pdf
[full-text, 38 pages]
Summary
When President George W. Bush announced his principles for immigration
reform in January 2004, he included an increase in permanent immigration as a key
component. President Bush has stated that immigration reform is a top priority of his
second term and has prompted a lively debate on the issue. Of an array of bills to
revise permanent admissions introduced, only one was enacted in the 109th Congress:
A provision in P.L. 109-13 (H.R. 1268, the emergency FY2005 supplemental
appropriation) makes up to 50,000 employment-based visas available for foreign
nationals coming to work as medical professionals. There is a widely held
expectation that the 110th Congress will consider immigration reform.
During the 109th Congress, the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act (S.
2611) would have substantially increased legal immigration and would have
restructured the allocation of these visas. S. 2611 would have doubled the number of
family-based and employment-based immigrants admitted over the next decade, as
well as expanded the categories of immigrants who may come without numerical
limits. The Senate passed S. 2611 on May 25, 2006. The major House-passed
immigration bill (H.R. 4437) did not revise family-based and employment-based
immigration. Proposals to alter permanent admissions were included in several other
immigration proposals (S. 1033/H.R. 2330, S. 1438, H.R. 3700, H.R. 3938, S. 1919).
Thus far in the 110th Congress, H.R. 75, H.R. 938, H.R. 1645, and S. 1348 would
revise categories for permanent admissions.
Four major principles underlie current U.S. policy on permanent immigration:
the reunification of families, the admission of immigrants with needed skills, the
protection of refugees, and the diversity of admissions by country of origin. These
principles are embodied in the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). The INA
specifies a complex set of numerical limits and preference categories that give
priorities for permanent immigration reflecting these principles. Legal permanent
residents (LPRs) refer to foreign nationals who live lawfully and permanently in the
United States.
During FY2005, a total of 1,122,373 aliens became LPRs in the United States.
Of this total, 57.8% entered on the basis of family ties. Additional major immigrant
groups in FY2005 were employment-based preference immigrants (including spouses
and children) at 22.0%, and refugees and asylees adjusting to immigrant status at
12.7%. Mexico led all countries with 161,445 aliens who became LPRs in FY2005.
India followed at a distant second with 84,681 LPRs. China came in third with
69,967. These three countries comprise 30% of all LPRs in FY2005.
Significant backlogs are due to the sheer volume of aliens eligible to immigrate
to the United States. Citizens and LPRs first file petitions for their relatives. After
the petitions are processed, these relatives then wait for a visa to become available
through the numerically limited categories. The siblings of U.S. citizens are waiting
11 years. Prospective LPRs from the Philippines have the most substantial waiting
times; consular officers are now considering the petitions of the brothers and sisters
of U.S. citizens from the Philippines who filed more than 22 years ago.
Contents
Latest Legislative Developments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Current Law and Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Worldwide Immigration Levels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Per-Country Ceilings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Other Permanent Immigration Categories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Admissions Trends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Immigration Patterns, 1900-2005 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
FY2005 Admissions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Backlogs and Waiting Times . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Visa Processing Dates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Petition Processing Backlogs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Recent Legislative History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Issues in the 108th Congress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Legislation Passed in the 109th Congress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Recaptured Visa Numbers for Nurses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Recaptured Employment-Based Visa Numbers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
USCIS Funding Trends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
FY2006 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
FY2007 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Major Issues in the 109th Congress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
President Bush's Immigration Reform Proposal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Securing America's Borders Act (S. 2454)/Chairman's Mark . . . . . . 19
Comprehensive Immigration Reform (S. 2611) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Secure America and Orderly Immigration Act (S. 1033/H.R. 2330) . . 23
Comprehensive Enforcement and Immigration Reform Act of 2005 . 23
Immigration Accountability Act of 2005 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Enforcement First Immigration Reform Act of 2005 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Additional Immigration Reduction Legislation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Permanent Partners . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Legislation in the 110th Congress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Key Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Balancing the Priorities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Broader Issues of Debate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Preference System versus Point System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Comprehensive Immigration Reform Legislation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
STRIVE (H.R. 1645) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Immigration Control and Reform Legislation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Nuclear Family Priority Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
USCIS Funding and Backlogs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
FY2008 Funding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Backlog Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
List of Figures
Figure 1. Annual Immigration Admissions and Status Adjustments, 1990-2005 . . . . . . . . . . 7
Figure 2. Legal Permanent Residents: New Arrivals and Adjustments of Status, FY1995-FY2005 . . . . . . . 8
Figure 3. Top Sending Countries (Comprising More Than Half of All LPRs): Selected Periods . . . . 9
Figure 4. Legal Immigrants by Major Category, FY2005 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Figure 5. Top Twelve Immigrant-Sending Countries, FY2005 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Figure 6. Projected Flow of LPRs under S. 2611, FY2007-FY2009 . . . . . . . . . . 21
List of Tables
Table 1. Legal Immigration Preference System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Table 2. Other Major Legal Immigration Categories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Table 3. FY2005 Immigrants by Category . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Table 4. Priority Dates for Family Preference Visas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Table 5. Priority Dates for Employment Preference Visas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Appendix A. Top Fifty Sending Countries in FY2005 by Category of LPR . . . 31
Appendix B. Processing Dates for Immigrant Petitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Appendix C. FY2005 Immigrants by Preference Category . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
______________________________
This information is provided to subscribers, friends, faculty, students and alumni of the School of Industrial & Labor Relations (ILR). It is a service of the Institute for Workplace Studies (IWS) in New York City. Stuart Basefsky is responsible for the selection of the contents which is intended to keep researchers, companies, workers, and governments aware of the latest information related to ILR disciplines as it becomes available for the purposes of research, understanding and debate. The content does not reflect the opinions or positions of Cornell University, the School of Industrial & Labor Relations, or that of Mr. Basefsky and should not be construed as such. The service is unique in that it provides the original source documentation, via links, behind the news and research of the day. Use of the information provided is unrestricted. However, it is requested that users acknowledge that the information was found via the IWS Documented News Service.
Stuart Basefsky
Director, IWS News Bureau
Institute for Workplace Studies
Cornell/ILR School
16 E. 34th Street, 4th Floor
New York, NY 10016
Telephone: (607) 255-2703
Fax: (607) 255-9641
E-mail: smb6@cornell.edu
****************************************
# posted by SBasefsky : 3:31 PM
