Members of the Latino Policy Forum’s Immigration Acuerdo recently hosted James Ferg-Cadima, regional counsel for the Mexican American Legal Defense Fund’s (MALDEF) national office. Ferg-Cadima and his D.C. team have poured over S744, the Senate’s proposed immigration reform bill, and as a result, have their fingers on the proverbial pulse of the complex web of negotiations the bill—and its peers in the House of Representatives—is being subjected to, as well as the day-to-day policy and advocacy processes on federal immigration reform. Ferg-Cadima provided perspective and clarified questions on S744, made some predictions for what we can expect by way of reform from the House, and updated us on pro-immigrant advocacy efforts set to take place before September, when the House is expected to release its pass at reform.
Ferg-Cadima focused on clarifying the murky details of what the newly-created Registered Provisional Immigrant (RPI) status will mean for potential applicants, the required triggers that must be met by the federal government before RPIs are able to apply for permanent residency, which groups of immigrants will receive a fast track to legalization, and how future migration flows were addressed in the bill, a move which would essentially create a 21st century Bracero program. But the conversation addressed a question that was nagging at many of us: Given that S744 includes a pathway to citizenship, does the “good” of the bill outweigh the “bad”—and even the “ugly”?
How Much is Too Much for a Pathway to Citizenship?
Ferg-Cadima was able to share a nuanced understanding of the bill with Acuerdo members, including what it actually is and is not, along with some little- and well-known details on the pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants. Ferg-Cadima also spent time myth-busting some of the rumors floating around about the specifics of the pathways, some inadvertently spread by well-meaning advocates.
RPI status will allow holders the ability to work legally in the U.S. without fear of deportation, and grant them limited opportunities to travel abroad. Though RPI status offers some benefits and is meant as a gateway to citizenship, the pathway is lengthy and sometimes complicated. Ferg-Cadima broke the pathway down into easily-digestible steps and the talk served as an excellent resource for Acuerdo members, the very folks who staff the organizations who will implement potential legislation in our communities. I’ve outlined Ferg-Cadima’s discussion of the pathway below, but this info-graphic serves as an excellent abridged version.
Please remember that the following outline is not legal advice. If you or someone you know is hoping to apply for RPI status if and when immigration reform passes in 2013, we ask that you seek legal counsel from a licensed attorney regarding the specifics of future or current immigration legislation.
According to Ferg-Cadima, applicants hoping to qualify for RPI status will:
- need professional legal advice before applying, especially if they there is any question relating to a potential criminal background.
- have one year to apply upon the completion of rulemaking, i.e. when the S744 becomes law (with a possible extension of 18 months).
- be eligible to apply if they have been in the U.S. since December 31, 2011 and will be required to extensively document each month of their lives to prove continuous presence in this country from that date (and likely earlier) to present, as well as throughout their time in RPI status.
- have access to a family visa option that will allow the primary applicant to RPI status to include immediate family members in a single application.
- be subject to a criminal background check (three misdemeanors or one felony will disqualify an applicant).
- be locked into RPI status once they begin the path, regardless of whether or not they are ultimately eligible to apply for permanent residency.
- pay $2,000 over the course of 10 years, plus application fees.
- pay any assessed taxes owed to the IRS.
- be required to pass all mandated civic/English competencies.
- need to show that they have access to income or resources at or above 100 percent poverty level or are pursuing an approved course of education during their first six years as an RPI.
- at time of application for permanent residency (a green card), need to show that they are at or above 125 percent of the poverty line or pursuing an approved course of education.
- not have access to healthcare or other public benefits during their time in provisional status, or at least 13 years.
Three categories of “priority” undocumented immigrants will be given a fast-track path to residency:
- Temporary Protective Status holders or TPS will immediately be able to apply for a green card once the bill takes effect if they have been in TPS for at least 10 years. If not, they must wait until they have held TPS for 10 years before applying.
- DREAMers (undocumented immigrants brought to this country as young children) will be eligible for residency after five years in RPI status, after which they can immediately apply for citizenship. This allows them to request adjustment status for immediate family members (but only if the immediate family members are not in RPI status). Additional benefits include access to most federal and state higher education support and lessened restrictions for those graduates seeking state licensures while in RPI status.
- Agricultural workers (AG-workers) will be immediately eligible for a blue card if they meet work requirements for the previous two years; they will be able to adjust to residency and eventually to citizenship within eight years, depending on the specifics of their situations.
Ferg-Cadima emphasized that there are essential immigration enforcement triggers (many of which will be difficult to meet) that must be in place before immigrants in RPI status are eligible to adjust to permanent residency, which at the earliest will be 10 years from the day the first batch of RPIs are approved. These triggers include:
- A comprehensive southern border security planmust be deployed and operational, and if not, a southern border security commission composed of representatives from those states will be created to ensure the southern border is secure
- A comprehensive fencing security plan must be implemented and 700 miles of fencing along the southern border must be completed
- A full 100 percent of businesses must be in compliance with the electronic employment verification system E-Verify
- A full biometric entry entry/exit system must be in place for both air and water ports
- An additional 20,000 border agents (for a total of 38,405 full-time border agents) must be deployed at the southern border
Aside from delving into the intricacies of the pathway to citizenship, Ferg-Cadima also discussed how the new Senate bill proposes to deal with a future flow of immigrants—by establishing a new guest worker program. Should their proposal become law, it will create a modern day Bracero program through its complicated W-Visa system for temporary and “low-skill” workers. These workers will not be immigrants in the traditional sense, but migrant workers who will be allowed to work in the U.S. for predetermined periods of time, will not be eligible to earn citizenship, and in most cases, will not be able to migrate with their families.
But where is the House of Representatives?
Despite the Senate’s efforts on immigration reform, the House has yet to step up to address the real problems with our current immigration system and will not take up S744 for debate. Instead the House’s bi-partisan “Gang of 7” are delaying (at best) their introduction of any comprehensive bill, despite already having many of the pieces in place. Members of the House “Gang of 7” have announced that their version of comprehensive immigration reform will likely be released sometime after Labor Day. House leadership has, however, agreed to move immigration reform through piecemeal legislation; five bills have already passed out of House Judiciary committee this year. The House is also expected to release the “KIDS Act”, which will likely provide an opportunity for DREAMers to adjust their status, but not achieve full citizenship. In a community hoping for a path to citizenship for all undocumented immigrants, the proposal has not received much support, with many youth and other advocates already rejecting the House’s DREAM legislation.
What has become clear is that immigration reform has now become a political game between House Republicans and Democrats, each party slow-walking the issue for its own political calculus. Democrats are looking to secure the Latino vote in 2014 by putting pressure on Republicans to act on reform this year, while Republicans—the vast majority of whom are relatively safe due to safely drawn districts during the last Census and redistricting process —have little motivation to take the lead.
Immigrant rights advocates must exercise caution when deciding how much they are willing to compromise for a “win” on immigration reform this year. S744 is most definitely the “high-water mark” on reform, according to both Ferg-Cadima and many other advocates and analysts nationwide. House proposals will undoubtedly be far worse in terms of proposals for restrictive, exclusive and punitive measures against immigrants and undocumented immigrants in particular.
Where do the national and local immigrant rights advocates stand on these recent developments?
MALDEF and the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) discussed how the National Hispanic Leadership Agenda, a national Hispanic coalition, is working on addressing the issue of immigration reform for Latinos and mobilizing community advocacy. Publicly, advocates across the country linked with the Alliance for Citizenship (formerly known as Reform Immigration for America) have targeted Republicans in their messaging, advocacy and public actions, deeming them “dinosaurs,” a party in danger of extinction.
Acuerdo members—including national groups such as LULAC, MALDEF, and National Alliance of Latin American and Caribbean Communities, as well as local organizations such as Access Living, HACES, Telpochcalli Community Education Project, and the Latino Policy Forum—have all weighed in on this issue and have agreed to take the information learned from Ferg-Cadima back to their members and discuss the best way to move forward.
The Latino Policy Forum has committed to continuing to stay engaged, above all through its on-going community education and strategic legislative advocacy. The Forum will continue to push Illinois House Representatives—Republicans and Democrats—to move on immigration reform this year, but with a message that focuses on ensuring that all individuals living in the U.S., regardless of their country of origin, are recognized as valuable and contributing members of society with equal access to equity and prosperity.
Ultimately, the challenge for immigration reform will be a conflict every federal policy issue faces: the compromises our “leaders” in D.C. make between what is good policy versus what is good politics, and where they draw the line. We are not naïve to this game, yet we will continue to collectively shake our heads in frustration that our elected officials are often more concerned about their next election cycles than the impact broken policies are having on our families and children.
(PHOTO: Riza Nugraha / Flickr / Creative Commons)