logo
Opinion - Don't make immigrants pay just to enter a visa lottery

Opinion - Don't make immigrants pay just to enter a visa lottery

Yahoo20-05-2025
The House Judiciary Committee unveiled a budget bill last month containing a provision designed, much like poll taxes, to undermine access to the Diversity Visa Program and disproportionately impact immigrants of color.
Further, the proposed provision weaponizes the program so that our U.S. government can fleece vulnerable people primarily from the Global South — and particularly from Africa.
This is personal for me for multiple reasons. I run an immigration law firm that represents Diversity Visa selectees. Some of my amazing paralegals are themselves former Diversity Visa selectees. On top of that, I am a candidate for Congress in the seat currently held by Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), a member of this misguided committee.
Issa's committee wants to charge Diversity Visa entrants at least $250 to enter the lottery. If each of the 20 million qualified entries received for the fiscal 2025 program were accompanied by $250, the U.S. could raise $5 billion. While that new revenue might sound great to a teenager working for DOGE, it does not account for those from whom the funds would come: some of the poorest people on earth.
This is wrong.
I once had a client, a single African woman who was selected but did not have the money for the medical exam, much less the Diversity Visa application fee. Her parents did not want her to lose the opportunity, and so they sold the land on which they had planned to build a home just to pay for the medical exam and $330 application so she could attend the immigrant visa interview. It is easy to forget that many people in this world have incomes of $12 per week, which comes to about $600 per year.
The 'get in line' crowd always omits how few and narrow paths there are to immigrate to the U.S., and how relatively expensive those paths already are.
The Diversity Visa program has led to a broader mix of nationalities represented in the U.S. immigrant population, creating a nation better equipped to understand and relate to the diversity of the world. Under the program, the U.S. issues visas specifically for immigrants who are natives of countries and regions from which fewer than 50,000 immigrants came to the U.S. over the previous five years. The program is responsible for the largest percentage of African and Black immigration to the U.S.
The luckiest of the selectees are granted immigrant visas and granted admission to enter the U.S, automatically becoming lawful permanent residents who may live and work in the country indefinitely.
Hopeful immigrants must submit entries each fall; they find out whether they 'won' by checking the State Department's website. Diversity Visa entrants for fiscal 2026 just recently got their results; with just shy of 20 million entrants this year, an entrant for 2026 had less than a 0.025 percent chance to be selected. From there, due to overselection, only about half of those selected are issued visas.
It is in that context that we cannot, ethically or morally, ask the poorest families on earth to spend $250 — nearly half their annual income — just for a negligible chance to be selected in the program. This would essentially constitute mass fraud. Immigration policy should be used as diplomatic tool to show other countries how great and fair good government can be. Instead, House Judiciary Committee Republicans are choosing to use immigration policy as a weapon to inflict harm on our country's credibility and reputation.
The U.S. is better than this. I pray that Americans stand up and say no to these misguided proposals.
Curtis Morrison is a California-based immigration attorney and candidate for Congress in California's 48th Congressional District.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Why does the federal jobs report get revised?
Why does the federal jobs report get revised?

The Hill

time24 minutes ago

  • The Hill

Why does the federal jobs report get revised?

Revisions to the jobs report issued by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) are at the center of a political firestorm after President Trump fired the agency's head earlier this month. The agency's most recent report revised down employment numbers for May and June by a whopping 258,000 jobs, drawing accusations by the president and his allies that the numbers were manipulated for political purposes. That's not true, most economists say. BLS instead revises its numbers to account for more information from its nationwide surveys, and the agency remains the gold standard for macroeconomic data in the U.S. Still, there are measures that the bureau could take, its supporters say, to modernize the collection of its survey data, particularly for its population survey — one of two surveys used to compile the jobs report. A group of former BLS heads has asked Congress to fund the agency with at least $770 million for the upcoming fiscal year. 'The greatest way to restore confidence would be ensuring that they have the resources they need,' said Kyle Ross, a fellow at the left-leaning Center for American Progress. Why the jobs report gets revised Each month, the BLS surveys a sample of more than 120,000 employers by email and phone, aiming to collect data on wages, total employment and other characteristics. At the end of the month, it publishes an initial estimate of how many jobs the U.S. has added from the data it has. The BLS also conducts a survey of households to track the employment status and take-home wages for the country at large. In the next two months, the bureau issues updates to its estimates, incorporating additional responses to the surveys and adjustments for seasonal changes. While the August revisions surprised many economists, they weren't the first time the BLS made large changes. During the pandemic, the agency had to make significant revisions to many of its estimates; in the summer of 2021, for example, it marked down its estimate for June to September job growth by 626,000 positions. Several key BLS surveys have struggled with falling response rates over the past two decades. The Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco estimates that response rates to the employment survey are around 45 percent, down to about 60 percent prior to the pandemic. However, the limited responses do not appear to have impacted the size of the BLS's revisions after 2022, the bank said in March. Over more than 60 years of data collection, the agency's initial job estimates have gradually become more accurate, according to analysis by Ernie Tedeschi, an economist at the Yale Budget Lab. Concerns over other BLS metrics Advocates say that while Trump's claims of political bias are baseless, the agency could use extra funding to be able to modernize particularly on its Current Population Survey, which polls households instead of businesses on employment. Friends of the BLS, an advocacy group that includes former commissioners William Beach and Erica Groshen, asked Congress in May to fund the agency with at least $770 million for the upcoming fiscal year. In a letter to appropriators, the group said that additional Congressional funding would allow the agency to go forward with long-planned updates to its data collection and methods. Among other modernization efforts, the agency is hoping to implement an online response model for its Current Population Survey. Additional funding, Beach and Groshen said, would also help the BLS maintain detailed data for important statistics like the Consumer Price Index, which tracks price inflation. The agency relies in part on data collectors who fan out across the country to monitor prices of goods and services. 'The field person will literally pick up a jar of, if I could say Pringles, and they'll say, well last month, we had 36 Pringles in here, and it's this month, it's the same price, but we only have 32 Pringles in here,' Beach, who was Trump's BLS pick during his first administration, told the Bloomberg podcast Odd Lots in April. 'That means that the product has actually gone up in price.' Last summer, in response to budget constraints, BLS mulled cutting the population survey's sample size by 5,000 households.

NY Dems aim to de-mask ICE agents to scare them off their raids — NOT to protect the public
NY Dems aim to de-mask ICE agents to scare them off their raids — NOT to protect the public

New York Post

time3 hours ago

  • New York Post

NY Dems aim to de-mask ICE agents to scare them off their raids — NOT to protect the public

Supporters claim a bill introduced by Democratic state lawmakers last month banning ICE agents and police from wearing masks during raids will ensure safety and prevent authoritarianism. One backer, Sen. Patricia Fahy, fumes that ICE is 'operating like masked militias' and 'paramilitary secret police' and so must be reined in. Nonsense: The awkwardly and misleadingly named Mandating End to Lawless Tactics Act is actually little more than an attempt to thwart immigration enforcement by making ICE agents fear for their personal safety. It joins similar efforts in other states and in Congress to 'unmask ICE.' In the words of GOP Sen. George Borrello, 'This bill is driven by ideology, not a genuine concern for public safety.' The Left's hypocrisy on this issue is staggering. Progressives — including many of the MELT Act's supporters in the Legislature — have opposed mask bans for criminal suspects and rioters, such as Nassau County's common-sense ban, which has exceptions for law enforcement. Yet for all their sympathy for those involved with the criminal-justice system, they have no qualms about painting cops as criminals and subjecting them to mask bans. If these lawmakers truly cared about public safety, they'd go after the rioters and real criminals who've routinely hidden their identities to evade accountability following the 2020 George Floyd unrest and Oct. 7 demonstrations. ICE and other law enforcement don't mask up because they have machinations of becoming a 'paramilitary secret police.' They do so to keep themselves and their families safe from multinational gangs such as Tren de Aragua. Facial-recognition technology, now rapidly improving due to AI, gives anyone — including nefarious actors like Antifa or cartel members — the ability to reverse image search the unmasked face of an ICE agent. They can then obtain and post their names, addresses and information about their relatives to social media. While the Justice Department can prosecute those responsible for such doxxing, it is nonetheless a frequent threat to agents and loved ones. Addresses of hotels where agents stay during operations are routinely spread on social media so that protesters can harass them. Agitators are so well-organized that an app was created to report and rush to ICE raid locations, as seen in Los Angeles riots this year. The Department of Homeland Security has reported an 830% increase in assaults on ICE personnel this year, attributed to an increase in doxxing and rhetoric against agents. Worse still, even if the MELT Act passes, its effects would be largely symbolic. Lawmakers like Fahy clearly don't understand federalism. Because the Constitution gives federal law precedence, any federal regulation would immediately supersede the MELT Act if passed, rendering it largely symbolic. Additionally, federal agents are immune from state criminal prosecution when acting within the scope of their authority. The MELT Act would also require that all law enforcement agents display their names or badge numbers on their uniforms, hamstringing the plainclothes units of local New York police departments, which now must only provide this information verbally. Some of the bill's supporters mention a more realistic point that masking without wearing identification might allow for easier impersonation of ICE officers. They might also argue that a lack of masking deters possible police misconduct, despite the widespread use of body cameras. Those are valid concerns. But there are ways to protect the public even with masked law enforcement. Public-education campaigns should remind residents that ICE agents and other law enforcement are legally required to identify themselves as police as soon as it is practicable and safe to do so. New Yorkers under arrest should keep in mind their constitutional protections, such as the right to remain silent and the right to an attorney. Masked or not, imposters can still pose as ICE or any other law-enforcement officers. Requiring names or badge numbers does nothing if there's no reliable way to immediately verify the person's legitimacy. The answer isn't a largely symbolic law to neuter real agents; it's to strengthen identification through local cooperation. The only way to fully reassure New Yorkers is cooperation between local police and ICE, whether via collaborative task forces, such as through the federal 287(g) program already adopted by several counties, or by having nearby officers accompany raids to keep public order, which would help quickly debunk any imposters. This type of public partnership would not be a political statement about immigration, rather a commonsense way to put the public at ease and ensure all involved in raids are safe. The MELT Act is symbolic theater that punishes law enforcement while doing nothing to realistically stop imposters. New Yorkers would be safer if lawmakers scrapped this bill and instead fostered real cooperation between local police and ICE to deter fraud and protect both the public and the agents doing dangerous work. Paul Dreyer is a cities policy analyst at the Manhattan Institute.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store