Student Union
Will Green Cards Be Cut in Half?
Sure, the likelihood of getting the Diversity Immigrant Visa is slim — about 0.3 percent. But 14 million applicants try to win one of about 50,000 spots in the Green Card lottery each year.
As of early February, though, the diversity visa is once again facing an uncertain future. Republican Senators Tom Cotton of Arkansas and David Perdue of Georgia proposed a bill ending it, in addition to dramatically cutting the number of other legal immigrants and refugees allowed every year.
A similar bill in the House of Representatives narrows the scope, only proposing to end the diversity visa.
The 22-year-old visa lottery has been threatened before in legislation sponsored by Republicans and Democrats as recently as last year. But it never became law.
Now with a Republican-controlled Congress and a president who has focused on immigration, the program is again at risk with the Reforming American Immigration for Strong Employment (RAISE) Act.
In a statement announcing the bill, the senators claimed it will “help raise American workers' wages.”
"We are taking action to fix some of the shortcomings in our legal immigration system," Perdue said. "Returning to our historically normal levels of legal immigration will help improve the quality of American jobs and wages."
Research has shown that the connection between jobs for Americans and immigration is tenuous. But there are other arguments against the lottery program.
For one, the program is susceptible to fraud, both by and against applicants, as the U.S. General Accountability Office found a decade ago.
The State Department improved the application to reduce the number of people who submit multiple applications in the same year, which is an automatic disqualification. Also, it alerts applicants that the lottery is free, and businesses charging a fee to submit lottery applications on applicants' behalf is illegal.
At its core, the diversity lottery was designed — as the name suggests — to diversify the immigrant stream to the U.S. from countries with lower immigration rates. When a country sends more than 50,000 immigrants to the U.S. in five years, they are excluded from the eligibility list.
Natives of Bangladesh, Brazil, Canada, China, Colombia, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Haiti, India, Jamaica, Mexico, Nigeria, Pakistan, the Philippines, Peru, South Korea, the United Kingdom (excepting Northern Ireland), and Vietnam were excluded from the most recent round of applications.
For applicants who don’t have a family or employer sponsor in the U.S., or who aren’t refugees, the Green Card lottery is the only option.
The lottery is a small portion of immigration to the U.S. every year, but larger than employment-based immigrant visas. In Fiscal Year 2015, the U.S. issued about 48,000 diversity visas out of 531,000 immigrant visas.
Carolien Hardenbol, a diversity visa recipient from the Netherlands, moved to the U.S. in the late 1990s with her husband as new parents with advanced degrees and a sense of adventure. Uncertain they would be sponsored for permanent residency through work, they applied for the diversity lottery — and her husband won.
"I envisioned this big hat where these envelopes were drawn,” she joked.
What started as a volunteer position with Sanctuary for Families, a nonprofit organization in New York that provides legal services to victims of domestic violence and human trafficking, turned into a career for Hardenbol. After getting her legal permanent residency, she became co-director of the Immigration Intervention Project there.
"Without diversity there would be no United States of America," says Hardenbol.
Do fewer immigrants mean more jobs for Americans?
The bill’s announcement follows a series of executive orders by President Donald Trump targeting immigrants, which have been met with lawsuits and protests.
It also reflects the policy suggestions of some groups who want to restrict immigration. Reducing or ending the diversity visa has been a platform for groups who want reduce immigration to the U.S.
The RAISE Act calls for cuts in family preference visas, refugee admissions, and the diversity lottery, while only adding a new W visa, to allow the foreign-born parents of adult U.S. citizens to visit for renewable five-year periods, without a path to citizenship or work approval.
Some immigration supporters say the 50,000 visas could be better used.
Florida-based immigration attorney John Gihon supports ending the diversity lottery, but only in favor of making more family visas available and creating a different opportunity for highly trained immigrants.
“People with degrees in STEM subjects, medicine, nursing, etc, that we know will provide them with an opportunity to find work and contribute to the country should not be denied the green cards simply because there is currently no employer to sponsor them and give them a job,” says Gihon.
Tekleab Elos Hailu applied a few times before winning the lottery. The father of three is a native of Eritrea; his wife is Ethiopian. They applied for the lottery while he was on a graduate scholarship in the United Kingdom, following a conflict between their home countries in the late 1990s.
His first job in the U.S. was working security at a rental car company, though he eventually returned to academia, researching the experiences of fellow diversity lottery recipients and finishing his doctorate. He now works at a community college in Colorado.
Because of the education or work experience required by the lottery, and the needs to be able to apply - like access to the internet and the funds to pay for the eventual green card fees, health screening, and travel - he believes diversity immigrants generally come from relatively well-off positions in their home countries, and as such are a net positive for the U.S.
“They sacrifice what they have had in their own countries, just to bring to change for their children,” says Hailu. “On the other hand, the United States gains from people who have been educated, without spending any money on these people. So why would you [cut it]?”
The RAISE Act has been referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee for review.
Follow legislative actions on S. 354 here here and H.R.1178 - SAFE for America Act here.
This story was first reported in VOANews.com. Do you have or want a Green Card? Please leave a comment here, and visit us on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and LinkedIn, thanks!
See all News Updates of the Day
Payments to college athletes to range from a few dollars to more than $1M under settlement
Thousands of former college athletes in the U.S. will be eligible for payments ranging from a few dollars to more than a million under the $2.78 billion antitrust settlement agreed to by the NCAA and five power conferences, a deal that also paves the way for schools to directly compensate athletes while attempting regulate payments from boosters.
Details of the sprawling plan were filed Friday in federal court in the Northern District of California, a little more than two months after the framework of an agreement was announced. The deal must still be approved by a judge.
"College athletes will finally be able to share in the billions of dollars their compelling stories and dynamic performances have generated for their schools, conferences, and the NCAA," the filing said. "This is nothing short of a seismic change to college sports following more than four years of hard-fought victories in this case."
The full term sheet includes guidelines on roster caps for individual sports that will replace scholarship limits; how the new financial payments will be monitored and enforced to ensure compliance by schools; how third-party payments to athletes will be regulated; and how nearly $3 billion in damages will be doled out over the next 10 years.
Those payouts will vary drastically and are determined by sport played, when, how long and what conference an athlete competed in. While Division I athletes across all sports will be eligible to collect damages, the majority of damages is expected to go to football and basketball players from power conferences because those leagues and teams generate most of the revenue that comes from billion-dollar media rights contracts.
The deal covers three antitrust cases — including the class-action lawsuit known as House vs. the NCAA — that challenged NCAA compensation rules dating to 2016. The plaintiffs claimed NCAA rules denied thousands of athletes the opportunity to earn millions of dollars off the use of their names, images and likenesses.
The NCAA lifted its ban on athletes earning money through endorsement and sponsorship deals in 2021.
The agreement does not settle the issue of whether college athletes should be deemed employees, but it does include language that would suggest the deal would be subject to change if "a change in law or circumstances permits collective bargaining."
The NCAA and college sports leaders continue to plead for help from Congress in the form of a federal law that would supersede state laws and allow the association and conferences to self govern without fear of future antitrust litigation.
"This settlement is an important step forward for student-athletes and college sports, but it does not address every challenge," the commissioners of the Atlantic Coast Conference, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-12, Southeastern Conference and NCAA President Charlie Baker said in a joint statement. "The need for federal legislation to provide solutions remains. If Congress does not act, the progress reached through the settlement could be significantly mitigated by state laws and continued litigation."
While that help still seems unlikely to come soon — especially with a presidential election months away — college sports leaders hope the settlement can provide some certainty for schools and finally stem the constant legal attacks on its antiquated model of amateurism.
Paying athletes
The NCAA and conferences have agreed to amend their rules to permit a landmark compensation system that allows schools to share up to about $21 million in athletic revenues with their athletes annually, starting in 2025.
The NCAA and conferences will be permitted to make rules that prevent schools from circumventing the cap.
That number is derived from taking 22% of the average revenue generated through media rights contracts, tickets and other sources by power conference schools. The agreement will create an audit system that allows plaintiffs to monitor athletic revenue, which is expected to rise in the coming years as new media rights agreements kick in for conferences and the College Football Playoff.
Athletes are projected to receive $1.5 billion to $2 billion annually.
All athletes will be eligible to receive the new financial benefits, but each school will be permitted to determine how they want to divvy up the money among sports. How exactly Title IX gender equity rules apply is still unclear and will require federal clarification. How schools comply with Title IX will be the responsibility of each institution.
Scholarships and rosters
Replacing scholarship limits with roster caps could mean even more athletic scholarship opportunities in Division I.
Most notably, major college football teams will now be permitted to have 105 player on scholarship instead of the current 85, though schools will no longer be required to give full scholarships to every football player.
Partial scholarships have been used in some sports for years, but will now be permitted in all.
The roster caps for baseball (34), softball (25) and volleyball (18) will also allow for a significant jump in the number of scholarships schools can provide in those sports, though schools will not be required to meet the cap.
NIL deals and oversight
NCAA rules have been tweaked to allow schools to be more involved in providing NIL opportunities for college athletes, but they will still be allowed to strike deals with third parties.
However, athletes will be required to report deals with third parties that surpass $600 to an outside clearinghouse.
The NCAA is also creating a public database that it hopes will allow athletes to assess fair market value.
Booster-funded NIL collectives have become a common way athletes are compensated, but now those deals will be subject to review through an arbitration process to determine if it is for a "valid business purpose," according to the agreement.
Violations could lead to eligibility penalties for athletes and sanctions for schools.
Damage payments
The plaintiffs in the House case are responsible for doling out damages. Included in Friday's filing was a chart breaking down the categories of eligible athletes along with four different types of payouts they could be in line to receive.
According to the plaintiffs, about 19,000 power conference football players and men's basketball players will be in line to receive an average of $91,000, with payments ranging from $15,000 to $280,000 just for what is referred to broadcast name, image and likeness.
Some of those same athletes could also be in line for tens of thousands of dollars more related to lost opportunities to earn NIL money while in college and what is deemed by the plaintiffs as pay-for-play. Plaintiffs' lawyers say a few athletes will be eligible to receive upward of $1 million.
Next steps
Plaintiffs' attorneys say they will file a motion for preliminary approval and — if granted — a public website will go up in about two months where former college athletes can determine how much they are eligible to receive.
Still, the settlement is months away from final approval. There will be an opportunity for athletes who are members of the plaintiffs' class to object to the settlement and ask to be excluded. Already one school, Houston Christian, has objected — though the judge denied its request to intervene.
"We are moving forward in the right direction by giving college athletes what they have EARNED & DESERVE which has been long overdue," said Sedona Prince, a college basketball player now at TCU and one of the plaintiffs in the House case. "We still have a long way to go and I pray athletes ask more questions and demand more answers from the leaders at their schools, conferences and the NCAA."
Survey: US college students score low in civic literacy
A recent survey commissioned by the American Council of Trustees and Alumni found that college student in the United States are lacking in civic education.
Writing for Ed Source, Emma Gallegos reports that most of those surveyed don’t know the terms lengths for members of Congress, and a third couldn’t identify the speaker of the House of Representatives. (July 2024)
Tips for first-year international students in the US
Book your flights right away, get a U.S. phone plan, make sure you have linens for your dorm and attend orientation – that’s some of the advice international students have for first-year college students coming from abroad.
U.S. News & World Report compiled helpful tips for students studying in the United States for the first time. (July 2024)
Survey: Social integration, career prep are important to international students
A recent survey of international students in the United States found that before starting school, they were concerned about personal safety, making friends and feeling homesick.
Inside Higher Ed reports that international students want specialized orientations, peer connections, career preparation and job placement to help make their college experiences successful. (July 2024)
US advisory council ends Nigeria visit, signs student exchange deal
Members of a U.S. presidential advisory council have approved a student exchange deal between an American college and a Nigerian university as part of the council's effort to strengthen collaboration on education, health, entrepreneurship and development between Africa and Africans living abroad.
The council also visited a health facility supported by the United States Agency for International Development in the capital.
Nigerian authorities and visitors chatted with members of the U.S President's Advisory Council on African Diaspora Engagement as they toured a healthcare facility in Karu, a suburb of Abuja, on the last day of the council's three-day visit to Abuja and Lagos.
The facility is one of many supported by the United States Agency for International Development, or USAID, to improve the management of childhood illnesses, family planning, immunization and delivery.
The tour was part of the council's effort to promote African diaspora-led investments in technology entrepreneurship, education and healthcare delivery.
"They're doing a phenomenal job there, it really gave us a sense of what the healthcare system is in Nigeria," said Deniece Laurent-Mantey, executive director of the advisory council. "This is our first trip as a council to the continent and we chose Nigeria for a reason — the diaspora in Nigeria is very active, very influential, and they're really a source of strength when it comes to our U.S.-Africa policy. And so for us coming to Nigeria was very intentional."
The council was created by President Joe Biden in September to improve collaboration between Africa and its diaspora in terms of economic and social development.
Akila Udoji, manager of the Primary Healthcare Centre of Karu, said officials in Nigeria were pleased that the council members were able to visit.
"We're happy that they have seen what the money they have given to us to work with has been used to do, because they have been able to assist us in capacity-building, trainings, equipment supply and the makeover of the facility," Udoji said.
Earlier, the council signed a deal for a student exchange program between Spelman College in the southern U.S. city of Atlanta and Nigeria's University of Lagos.
Laurent-Mantey said education exchanges are one of the council's top priorities.
"In Lagos, we had the president of Spelman College — she's also a member of our council — she signed an agreement with the University of Lagos to further education exchange programs in STEM and creative industries between those two universities," Laurent-Mantey said. "And I think for us it's very important, because Spelman College is a historically Black university, and so here we are promoting the importance of collaboration between African Americans and Africans."
In March, the advisory council adopted its first set of recommendations for the U.S. president, including the student exchange initiative, advocating for more U.S. government support for Africa, climate-focused initiatives, and improving U.S. visa access for Africans.
The council met with Nigerian health and foreign affairs officials during the visit before leaving the country on Wednesday.
