10 ms·

Trump unveils 'merit-based' immigration policy plan

71 points by godelmachine 7y ago

godelmachine 7y ago
So, do those who have Masters degrees from US get preference over those who don’t possess any sort of Bachelors or Masters degrees from US?
- mfatica 7y ago
  Considering there's been a high incidence of low quality "degrees" from other countries I would hope so
  - glenda 7y ago
    Same issue in the US, especially with the rise of predatory, unaccredited colleges.
- frankbreetz 7y ago
  This is unlikely to be passed. It has to be approved by Congress, which is controlled by the opposing party. Even if the Republicans win the next election it is unlikely this specific bill will be passed. As far as the specifics for this, all the article says is highly educated people would be given preference. I would assume this would mean a person with a master's degree would be given more preference than one with a bachelor's, but not as much as one with a doctorate. I am sure the area study would play a large role in this as well. Job offers are always helpful, as is the ability to speak English
  - WillPostForFood 7y ago
    Congress isn't controlled by the opposing party, it is split. Regardless, there is value in the proposal because, agree or disagree, it is actual policy you can't weigh in on by voting in the next election, not just the usual vitriol.
    - frankbreetz 7y ago
      You're right, the House of Representatives is controlled by the opposing party, I always wrongly consider this "Congress" because it is full of what we call Congressmen and women, whereas the other house of Congress is filled with Senators, which I supposed are also Congressmen and women, but I never hear them called that.
avocado4 7y ago
This is dead on arrival in Congress.
idlewords 7y ago
This seems like it would set up a situation where immigrants really do compete for US jobs, rather than being a net economic positive. Right now, unauthorized immigrants are 24% of maids and cleaners, half of ag workers, and a big chunk of construction labor and home aides like nannies. These jobs are filled by immigrants because they are a big step up for a lot of the people arriving here, while Americans don't want them. In a saner world, work visas for unskilled labor and a pathway up to citizenship would benefit everyone. Instead, the president seems to want a carve-out for the tech and health industry that makes life more precarious for everyone else. Source on numbers: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/illegal-immigrants-us-jobs-economy-farm-workers-taxes/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/illegal-immigrants-us-jobs-econ...
- wtdata 7y ago
  Sure, but on the other side, the pay for those jobs would also have a bigger pressure on them to increase. Someone will always have to do those jobs (at least for a long time until when/if machines do them), we shouldn't expect them to be fulfilled only by immigrants willing to take jobs that nobody else wants. In Scandinavia - up to a degree - those kind of jobs carry a big pay and a set of perks that makes people actually wanting to take them, instead of being a last resort activity. It also helps create a positive view in society about those jobs instead of being a motive for social discrimination.
  - idlewords 7y ago
    I paid $80 for a cheese pizza in Norway.
- JPKab 7y ago
  "while Americans don't want them" Former construction worker here. Americans don't want these jobs at the below-market wages they pay. The wages would be higher if not for the supply being inflated by laborers willing to work for below minimum wage. The most dangerous job in the world (Alaskan crab fisherman) is brutal, dirty, and high paying. Therefore there are always American citizens waiting on the docks to learn the trade. Not saying I don't want more immigration in the US. I want WAY more of it, but only if it's not reducing pay in entry level vocations.
ianhawes 7y ago
> Senior Democrats dismissed his ideas as "dead-on-arrival". That is the most important line of the article. Without Democrat support, this plan will not pass in this congress. While it is possible it could pass in the next congress (2021), I would characterize it as unlikely. Both parties see the status quo in legal immigration as a good thing, with most changes in the day-to-day policies of USCIS being dictated by court rulings and not congress.
- Shivetya 7y ago
  why would they be any other way. We have been trapped in a cycle of party first American second for far too long. The schism caused by the Tea Party was the first major rebellion within a political party and it took years before the Republican party could co-opt it and bury it. The Democrats had an inkling of similar with a few candidates displacing established players but they are too few and too radical in general to steer the party in a different direction. however most all reforms towards voting all lead to the same outcome, no competition for established parties. Oh sure they dress it up and market it as protecting us from big special interest or money but the real outcome is, no one is permitted to run who does not have the blessing of either party. the US pays towards the security of only the Democrat or Republican conventions just to make it clear how much they have locked out all other choices. People decry barriers to voting but the real issue is the barrier to even be a choice.
burlesona 7y ago
That article didn’t really spell out any details, but coming from Trump I doubt the details are good. That said, I’ve always thought there was a glaring hole in our immigration policy, which is that people who come and earn a degree in the US should have an easy option to stay and work and become citizens if they would like. It seems crazy to me that we’re investing a ton in the people who come here for higher education and then making it difficult for them to stay here and use the skills and education they acquired.
- skohan 7y ago
  I totally agree. I don't know anything about the details of this proposal so I can't speak to those specifically, but I don't see how it would be anything other than a slam-dunk to make it easy for people educated in the US to stay in the US. They are very likely to be higher-skilled and economically stable, and have already spent years assimilating. The only people I can imagine who would be against this are corporate interests, who can use visas to enforce a kind of indentured-servitude over high-skilled workers seeking residency in the current system. But given the way the economic winds are blowing, I don't see how the US is going to compete in the future if they don't try to keep all the talent in the country they can.
- godelmachine 7y ago
  >>”we’re investing a ton in the people who come here for higher education” Don’t foreign people coming for higher education pay tuition fees out of their own pockets?
  - burlesona 7y ago
    I didn't mean we are paying cash to them, what I mean is the US institutions are investing time and energy -- yes in exchange for cash which came from them. The experience I was drawing this from is the international students who I studied with, many of whom were really smart and who had acquired a great deal of technical skill here in the US, who then wanted to stay and use their skills here but had a difficult time with the immigration process. To me it's crazy that we'd push high-skill people back out of the country if they'd like to stay.
jorblumesea 7y ago
As the article pointed out, no dreamer compromise so it will never pass the house. It is likely useful for uniting the fractured Republican base, but that's about it.
- WillPostForFood 7y ago
  Democrats can add a dreamer compromise and then pass it and see what happens. White House has signaled many times they are willing to do something for the dreamers in exchange for something.
  - larkost 7y ago
    The White House may have signaled that, but so far when presented with actual compromises the President has always aggressively rejected them. This is one of the areas that people use to show that the White House staff and the President are not actually on the same page.
  - dragonwriter 7y ago
    > Democrats can add a dreamer compromise and then pass it and see what happens Why would they do that? As it is the proposal is a gift to Democrats, exactly what they ought to want to run against: a Republican flip-flop from opposing immigrants taking American jobs to wanting only immigrants who will take good jobs away from Americans. At best, endorsing it would deepen the split between the neoliberal centrist wing of the Democratic Party and the progressive populist wing, but even the neoliberal centrist wing, which probably likes the idea of more focus on immigrants who can depress wages for good jobs, probably doesn't like it coming at the expense of family unification (they’d prefer to see it on top.) > White House has signaled many times they are willing to do something for the dreamers in exchange for something. Only for a very narrow definition of “something”; they've flat out expressly stated (not merely signalled) that they are unwilling to do so except in exchange for The Wall.
  - jorblumesea 7y ago
    The demands the White House will have will be unpalatable to the Democrats so it's effectively dead. They'll want huge, politically unrealistic concessions in exchange for a dreamer compromise.
iscrewyou 7y ago
People talking about this not passing Congress, they know. This is a play for the next election. He made promises in his last election that he can’t keep. Now this will let him blame someone while saying look I tried.
- suyash 7y ago
  The real question we need to ask here is why won't it pass in Congress, answer is Democrats are blindly opposed to Trump even if he wants to do something that is great for the country. This is the root of the problem in this case.
  - avocado4 7y ago
    It wouldn't have passed under any other Republican leadership, let alone Trump. If you want Democrats on board any immigration package would need to contain path to citizenship for undocumented folks.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
snvzz 7y ago
This works out well for Japan. Why wouldn't it for the US? The way I see it, only those highly qualified shall apply. If an american can do the job, then an american should do it.
- craftyguy 7y ago
  I wonder if trump's mail order wife would have had enough merits in this system?
  - briandear 7y ago
    HN Guidelines: “Be kind. Don't be snarky... Eschew flamebait. Don't introduce flamewar topics unless you have something genuinely new to say. Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle. It destroys intellectual curiosity, which the site exists for.” If you want to make a comment about the First Lady, you could have said “I wonder if Mrs. Trump would have qualified under the proposed standards.” That could have then led to a discussion of how visas had been allocated in the past. Calling her a mail order bride adds nothing to the conversation and instead just serves as a cheap shot based on a dislike of Trump rather than a debate on the policies.
    - craftyguy 7y ago
      >Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle. It destroys intellectual curiosity, which the site exists for.” Half the posts on 'hacker' 'news' are for inciting political/ideological battles, including this article. It has nothing to do with the guidelines for what types of articles should be posted on 'hacker' 'news'. Or did you selectively choose to ignore those?
      - dang 7y ago
        That's not even close to true, though I can understand why it might feel true.
- legohead 7y ago
robbrit 7y ago
For once, I think that Trump is actually taking something in the right direction. With a few tweaks that make Democrats happy, this will actually be a net-positive over the current lottery-based system. Hopefully they overhaul the green card process too. It's a pain to see a senior engineer from India or China have to go home because their 6 years of H-1B are up.

71 points by godelmachine 7y ago

So, do those who have Masters degrees from US get preference over those who don’t possess any sort of Bachelors or Masters degrees from US?

mfatica 7y ago
Considering there's been a high incidence of low quality "degrees" from other countries I would hope so
- glenda 7y ago
  Same issue in the US, especially with the rise of predatory, unaccredited colleges.
frankbreetz 7y ago
This is unlikely to be passed. It has to be approved by Congress, which is controlled by the opposing party. Even if the Republicans win the next election it is unlikely this specific bill will be passed. As far as the specifics for this, all the article says is highly educated people would be given preference. I would assume this would mean a person with a master's degree would be given more preference than one with a bachelor's, but not as much as one with a doctorate. I am sure the area study would play a large role in this as well. Job offers are always helpful, as is the ability to speak English
- WillPostForFood 7y ago
  Congress isn't controlled by the opposing party, it is split. Regardless, there is value in the proposal because, agree or disagree, it is actual policy you can't weigh in on by voting in the next election, not just the usual vitriol.
  - frankbreetz 7y ago
    You're right, the House of Representatives is controlled by the opposing party, I always wrongly consider this "Congress" because it is full of what we call Congressmen and women, whereas the other house of Congress is filled with Senators, which I supposed are also Congressmen and women, but I never hear them called that.

avocado4 7y ago

This is dead on arrival in Congress.

idlewords 7y ago

This seems like it would set up a situation where immigrants really do compete for US jobs, rather than being a net economic positive. Right now, unauthorized immigrants are 24% of maids and cleaners, half of ag workers, and a big chunk of construction labor and home aides like nannies. These jobs are filled by immigrants because they are a big step up for a lot of the people arriving here, while Americans don't want them. In a saner world, work visas for unskilled labor and a pathway up to citizenship would benefit everyone. Instead, the president seems to want a carve-out for the tech and health industry that makes life more precarious for everyone else. Source on numbers: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/illegal-immigrants-us-jobs-economy-farm-workers-taxes/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/illegal-immigrants-us-jobs-econ...

wtdata 7y ago
Sure, but on the other side, the pay for those jobs would also have a bigger pressure on them to increase. Someone will always have to do those jobs (at least for a long time until when/if machines do them), we shouldn't expect them to be fulfilled only by immigrants willing to take jobs that nobody else wants. In Scandinavia - up to a degree - those kind of jobs carry a big pay and a set of perks that makes people actually wanting to take them, instead of being a last resort activity. It also helps create a positive view in society about those jobs instead of being a motive for social discrimination.
- idlewords 7y ago
  I paid $80 for a cheese pizza in Norway.
JPKab 7y ago
"while Americans don't want them" Former construction worker here. Americans don't want these jobs at the below-market wages they pay. The wages would be higher if not for the supply being inflated by laborers willing to work for below minimum wage. The most dangerous job in the world (Alaskan crab fisherman) is brutal, dirty, and high paying. Therefore there are always American citizens waiting on the docks to learn the trade. Not saying I don't want more immigration in the US. I want WAY more of it, but only if it's not reducing pay in entry level vocations.

ianhawes 7y ago

> Senior Democrats dismissed his ideas as "dead-on-arrival". That is the most important line of the article. Without Democrat support, this plan will not pass in this congress. While it is possible it could pass in the next congress (2021), I would characterize it as unlikely. Both parties see the status quo in legal immigration as a good thing, with most changes in the day-to-day policies of USCIS being dictated by court rulings and not congress.

Shivetya 7y ago
why would they be any other way. We have been trapped in a cycle of party first American second for far too long. The schism caused by the Tea Party was the first major rebellion within a political party and it took years before the Republican party could co-opt it and bury it. The Democrats had an inkling of similar with a few candidates displacing established players but they are too few and too radical in general to steer the party in a different direction. however most all reforms towards voting all lead to the same outcome, no competition for established parties. Oh sure they dress it up and market it as protecting us from big special interest or money but the real outcome is, no one is permitted to run who does not have the blessing of either party. the US pays towards the security of only the Democrat or Republican conventions just to make it clear how much they have locked out all other choices. People decry barriers to voting but the real issue is the barrier to even be a choice.

burlesona 7y ago

That article didn’t really spell out any details, but coming from Trump I doubt the details are good. That said, I’ve always thought there was a glaring hole in our immigration policy, which is that people who come and earn a degree in the US should have an easy option to stay and work and become citizens if they would like. It seems crazy to me that we’re investing a ton in the people who come here for higher education and then making it difficult for them to stay here and use the skills and education they acquired.

skohan 7y ago
I totally agree. I don't know anything about the details of this proposal so I can't speak to those specifically, but I don't see how it would be anything other than a slam-dunk to make it easy for people educated in the US to stay in the US. They are very likely to be higher-skilled and economically stable, and have already spent years assimilating. The only people I can imagine who would be against this are corporate interests, who can use visas to enforce a kind of indentured-servitude over high-skilled workers seeking residency in the current system. But given the way the economic winds are blowing, I don't see how the US is going to compete in the future if they don't try to keep all the talent in the country they can.
godelmachine 7y ago
>>”we’re investing a ton in the people who come here for higher education” Don’t foreign people coming for higher education pay tuition fees out of their own pockets?
- burlesona 7y ago
  I didn't mean we are paying cash to them, what I mean is the US institutions are investing time and energy -- yes in exchange for cash which came from them. The experience I was drawing this from is the international students who I studied with, many of whom were really smart and who had acquired a great deal of technical skill here in the US, who then wanted to stay and use their skills here but had a difficult time with the immigration process. To me it's crazy that we'd push high-skill people back out of the country if they'd like to stay.

jorblumesea 7y ago

As the article pointed out, no dreamer compromise so it will never pass the house. It is likely useful for uniting the fractured Republican base, but that's about it.

WillPostForFood 7y ago
Democrats can add a dreamer compromise and then pass it and see what happens. White House has signaled many times they are willing to do something for the dreamers in exchange for something.
- larkost 7y ago
  The White House may have signaled that, but so far when presented with actual compromises the President has always aggressively rejected them. This is one of the areas that people use to show that the White House staff and the President are not actually on the same page.
- dragonwriter 7y ago
  > Democrats can add a dreamer compromise and then pass it and see what happens Why would they do that? As it is the proposal is a gift to Democrats, exactly what they ought to want to run against: a Republican flip-flop from opposing immigrants taking American jobs to wanting only immigrants who will take good jobs away from Americans. At best, endorsing it would deepen the split between the neoliberal centrist wing of the Democratic Party and the progressive populist wing, but even the neoliberal centrist wing, which probably likes the idea of more focus on immigrants who can depress wages for good jobs, probably doesn't like it coming at the expense of family unification (they’d prefer to see it on top.) > White House has signaled many times they are willing to do something for the dreamers in exchange for something. Only for a very narrow definition of “something”; they've flat out expressly stated (not merely signalled) that they are unwilling to do so except in exchange for The Wall.
- jorblumesea 7y ago
  The demands the White House will have will be unpalatable to the Democrats so it's effectively dead. They'll want huge, politically unrealistic concessions in exchange for a dreamer compromise.

iscrewyou 7y ago

People talking about this not passing Congress, they know. This is a play for the next election. He made promises in his last election that he can’t keep. Now this will let him blame someone while saying look I tried.

suyash 7y ago
The real question we need to ask here is why won't it pass in Congress, answer is Democrats are blindly opposed to Trump even if he wants to do something that is great for the country. This is the root of the problem in this case.
- avocado4 7y ago
  It wouldn't have passed under any other Republican leadership, let alone Trump. If you want Democrats on board any immigration package would need to contain path to citizenship for undocumented folks.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

snvzz 7y ago

This works out well for Japan. Why wouldn't it for the US? The way I see it, only those highly qualified shall apply. If an american can do the job, then an american should do it.

craftyguy 7y ago
I wonder if trump's mail order wife would have had enough merits in this system?
- briandear 7y ago
  HN Guidelines: “Be kind. Don't be snarky... Eschew flamebait. Don't introduce flamewar topics unless you have something genuinely new to say. Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle. It destroys intellectual curiosity, which the site exists for.” If you want to make a comment about the First Lady, you could have said “I wonder if Mrs. Trump would have qualified under the proposed standards.” That could have then led to a discussion of how visas had been allocated in the past. Calling her a mail order bride adds nothing to the conversation and instead just serves as a cheap shot based on a dislike of Trump rather than a debate on the policies.
  - craftyguy 7y ago
    >Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle. It destroys intellectual curiosity, which the site exists for.” Half the posts on 'hacker' 'news' are for inciting political/ideological battles, including this article. It has nothing to do with the guidelines for what types of articles should be posted on 'hacker' 'news'. Or did you selectively choose to ignore those?
    - dang 7y ago
      That's not even close to true, though I can understand why it might feel true.
legohead 7y ago

robbrit 7y ago

For once, I think that Trump is actually taking something in the right direction. With a few tweaks that make Democrats happy, this will actually be a net-positive over the current lottery-based system. Hopefully they overhaul the green card process too. It's a pain to see a senior engineer from India or China have to go home because their 6 years of H-1B are up.