

Fixing Our Broken Immigration System Through Executive Action – Key Facts - kmfrk
http://www.dhs.gov/immigration-action

======
netcan
I realize that a government or legislature deals in a world of compromises
posing as moral imperative, but on immigration specifically I find it hard to
stomach.

I think immigration systems are inherently broken. Free movement is a basic
freedom. The right to take employment is a basic right. All compromises that
make these rights and freedoms subservient to an immigration policy are
inherently broken by the standards I consider moral.

Add to that the fact that many of the focuses on the problem with immigrants
are xenophobic at their core, whether obvious or not.

This isn't just a theoretical objection, we can see the basic compromises at a
high level poisoning everything.

Take "migrant workers" as a category. Their right to be present is inherently
linked to employment. This gives their employer a kind of power over them that
is inconsistent with liberal democratic civil rights. They don't vote. Aren't
represented. Take this to an extreme and we end up with something like the
gulf states, societies where migrant workers are the majority and have their
rights limited in ways that harken to Ancient slave-citizen societies.

Thee's an old cliche that 'freedom is indivisible.' It's crude, but I think
there's a lot to it. Once freedom of movement is limited, it can be
negotiated. Those granted permission do so are asked to forfeit rights or they
immigrate illegally and forfeit rights. In either case we end up with
societies where not everyone has the same rights. The lack of freedom
permeates.

I really do hope that eventually we will be in a world where freedom of
movement is a universal human right.

~~~
Shivetya
I am not against free movement between countries, however I do not feel anyone
is entitled to move into another country and expecting a hand out. Immigrants
used to move to other countries fully expecting to bust their ass integrating
into society, the goal was to make their children's lives better.

The issue here is that this change will damage the job prospects of the
underemployed and poor that are already here and divert resources aimed at
helping them. We are basically importing a new underclass in many cases which
unless there is work for them means they many get sucked into the criminal
world, exploited and generally worse off. Why do I say underclass, because
most will not be eligible for assistance.

Freedom comes with responsibility, to yourself and those whom live around you.
There are many things wrong in our immigration policy, the fees alone are
silly. However executive actions may not be the best route. It is a pure
political play of a man whose actions were timed to after an election and
after he lost support of the Senate. If he was so concerned he would have done
it his first two years in office.

As to the benefits and why each element is good or bad, the information at
[http://www.cato.org/blog/obamas-immigration-executive-
order-...](http://www.cato.org/blog/obamas-immigration-executive-order-policy-
implications) is invaluable.

~~~
netcan
Just the fact that most people in most places immediate reaction this kind of
idea is "handouts" is proof of a problem. We don't have that kind of reaction
to people "expecting handouts" who aren't immigrants. Immigrants as a whole
are usually members of lower middle classes. Not huge tax contributors, but
not a welfare dependent group either.

The biggest welfare dependent groups within most countries are entrenched
subcultures that have built up the habit over 2 or more generations.

There is no reason to assume on the whole that immigrants are an economic
drain. The huge gap between people's instinctive reaction and reality, is IMO
xenophobia.

Anyway, I think economics might be part of the practicalities, but shouldn't
be the heart of the discussion. This is a fundamental moral issue, not an
economic one.

------
greg
There is one new statement specifically referring to start-ups:

"Second, pursuant to the "significant public benefit" parole authority under
section 6 212(d)(5) ofthe INA, USCIS should propose a program that will permit
DHS to grant parole status, on a case-by-case basis, to inventors,
researchers, and founders ofstart-up enterprises who may not yet qualify for a
national interest waiver, but who have been awarded substantial U.S. investor
financing or otherwise hold the promise of innovation and job creation through
the development of new technologies or the pursuit of cutting- edge research.
Parole in this type of circumstance would allow theseindividuals to
temporarily pursue research and development ofpromising new ideas and
businesses in the United States, rather than abroad. This regulation will
include income and resource thresholds to ensure that individuals eligible for
parole under this program will not be eligible for federal public benefits or
premium tax credits under the Health Insurance Marketplace of the Affordable
Care Act."

From the linked document
[http://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/14_1120_...](http://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/14_1120_memo_business_actions.pdf):

------
seanieb
"Support High-skilled Business and Workers" \-
[http://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/14_1120_...](http://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/14_1120_memo_business_actions.pdf)

Am I correct in thinking that this doesn't amount to anything big for H-1B
holders who are seeking a green card? It will speed up the application process
initially, those who were waiting along time will get their Green Card faster,
but then it'll grind to halt until the following years quota comes into play.
Am I missing something?

------
Juneau
I was expecting more precise details.. For example we know that they want to
increase the scope of STEM OPT program but we don't how long they gonna extend
or if there are changes, will they apply to the candidates already in OPT. Its
more like directives.. I am not sure if this is how executive action works ??

*edit: typos

~~~
rbanffy
This is a just series of directions to the USCIS. Well see the details when
the USCIS publishes the new rules as directed. It'll take some time and
probably face opposition from the legislative branch too, so you should not
expect anything in the very short term.

------
edent
We have free movement of Capital - why don't we have free movement of Labour?

If a factory or call centre can move its operations anywhere in the world, why
shouldn't workers also be able to relocate to an area which is more profitable
for them?

------
jokoon
[http://i.imgur.com/n9uiP5G.png](http://i.imgur.com/n9uiP5G.png)

those r and f are malformed. using firefox latest on win7.

is this a webfont or a css3 bug ?

