Mediaboss Marketing

Rep. Tom Reed applauded the passage of the Bipartisan and Problem Solvers Caucus endorsed Farm Workforce Modernization Act of 2019 to help struggling farmers in New York gain access to much needed farm workers.

I hear it every time I step on family farms in Upstate New York when is Washington going to do something about access for farm labor?' Reed said. This common sense bipartisan compromise is a step in the right direction for this decades old problem, and will deliver relief to the farmers we care about across the nation to give them fair access to workers they need to prosper. I am proud the Problem Solvers Caucus could get behind this bill as we pushed it over the finish line in the House and onto the Senate.

However, this is just the start of immigration reform. We must secure our southern border and continue to fight to ensure a merit-based system is fully implemented such as the one proposed by President Trump this spring, concluded Reed.

The bill takes a two-pronged approach to meet year-round labor needs: creating a new, capped program for employers seeking to bring in temporary workers for year-round needs; and builds off current law dedicating an additional 40,000 employment-based green cards per year for agricultural workers. It also includes mandatory e-verify, new investments in farmworker housing, H-2A wage reform, and streamlined recruiting.

Access to a reliable workforce is a critical issue for Upstate New York dairy farmers like me, said family farmer David White from Clymer. I milk my cows 365 days a year. Current agricultural visa programs are seasonal and therefore dont provide a solution to dairys unique challenges. I commend Congressman Tom Reed for his work to support and pass the bipartisan Farm Workforce Modernization Act to address this critical issue for our Upstate economy.

New York Farm Bureau appreciates Rep. Reeds leadership in cosponsoring the bipartisan Farm Workforce Modernization Act. Farms in his district and across the state need access to reliable labor in order to produce the food we need and to support our rural economy. This legislation would especially support dairy farmers who have long been without access to the agricultural visa program, said David Fisher, New York Farm Bureau President.

We applaud House passage today of the bipartisan Farm Workforce Modernization Act, which takes significant strides to make badly needed improvements to agriculture immigration policy that address dairys unique workforce challenges, said Jim Mulhern, President and CEO of the National Milk Producers Federation. Congressman Reed has been a vocal champion on this issue for Upstate New York dairy farmers and we thank him for cosponsoring this bipartisan bill and working to build momentum for this win in the House.

A resounding Thank You to all who have helped to call attention to Fredonia in the Small Business Revolution! ...

LAKEWOOD The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation recently issued bid invitations for a ...

OLEAN Tina Hastings, executive director of the Tri County Arts Council, recently announced that she will be ...

By TODD TRANUMPresident and CEO of the Chautauqua County Chamber of Commerce & Executive Director of the ...

Original post:
Reed applauds passage of bill to help NY farmers with access to workers | News, Sports, Jobs - Evening Observer

In my last post, I discussed most of the top-line findings from the recent "U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement [ICE] Fiscal Year 2019 Enforcement and Removal Operations [ERO] Report". Long-story short: ICE's ability to perform interior enforcement in FY 2019 was significantly impeded by its need to respond to the massive influx of aliens encountered by U.S. Customs and Border Protection at the Southwest border, and by an increase in sanctuary policies. I omitted the report's findings about so-called "alternatives to detention" (ATD). Basically, they don't work.

The section of the report relating to ATD begins by explaining what it is: "ICE's [ATD] program uses technology and case management to monitor aliens' court appearances and compliance with release conditions while their removal proceedings are pending on the non-detained immigration court docket."

The Center has previously explained the limitations of the program:

ATD is, on a daily basis, cheaper than detention, but because ATD participants are placed into the "non-detained" docket of the immigration courts (as opposed to the significantly faster hearings that aliens receive on the detained docket), those savings may be wiped out over the course of two, three, or four years on the program while aliens await the docketing and conclusion of their cases.

...

Long-term data do not conclusively establish the value of the programs in actually ensuring removal from the United States of ATD participants once they have been ordered removed. [Emphasis added.]

The report echoes the highlighted excerpt, above: "ATD is not a substitute for detention, but instead complements immigration enforcement efforts by offering increased supervision for a small subset of eligible aliens who are not currently in ICE detention."

That doesn't sound so bad at first blush, but note the introductory statement that "ATD is not a substitute for detention." That is simply a subtle reiteration of what most objective observers have known for some time. Detention ensures that an alien who is ordered removed is actually removed, without ERO having to go out and arrest the alien. ATD (which is essentially a monitoring program as the first excerpt above makes clear) does not.

In particular, ATD does little to prevent aliens from absconding, let alone to ensure that an alien shows up for removal, as the report explains when it later modifies the complementary nature of ATD: "[W]hile ATD can complement other immigration enforcement efforts when used appropriately on a vetted and monitored population of participants, the program was not designed to facilitate ERO's mission of removing aliens with final orders." (Emphasis added.)

I am not sure what "other immigration enforcement efforts" ERO is referencing here, but frankly, "removing aliens with final orders" is the ultimate one, both temporally and in order of precedence. As Barbara Jordan, then-chairwoman of the Clinton-era Commission on Immigration Reform, explained more than two decades ago: "The top priorities for detention and removal, of course, are criminal aliens. But for the system to be credible, people actually have to be deported at the end of the process." (Emphasis added.) ICE can do all the enforcement it wants, but if aliens under a final order of removal are not ultimately removed, the whole system is a sham.

And, as noted, ATD is ineffective at preventing aliens from absconding. The most damning extrinsic proof of this is found in CNN's reporting on the April 16, 2019, "Final Emergency Interim Report" from the Homeland Security Advisory Council's bipartisan CBP Families and Children Care Panel, which I referenced in my last post.

As CNN explained, the panel recommended that: "DHS ... should be given discretion to detain a close relative with a non-parent family member when this is in the best interest of the child."

The outlet then asked Karen Tandy, the chairwoman of that panel, whether "the council considered alternatives to detention, rather than changes to the law." Tandy responded that the group "'spent a lot of time on it' but found it impractical," explaining: "In common parlance, we're talking about ankle bracelets, and we found at bus station [sic], there are overflowing bins of ankle bracelets that have been cut off."

The report reinforced Tandy's findings, noting that ATD was particularly ineffective when used to monitor released family units, which constituted 64.5 percent of all aliens apprehended by the Border Patrol along the Southwest border in FY 2019.

As the report explains:

While ERO has expanded its use of ATD from approximately 23,000 participants in FY 2014 to 96,000 as of the end of FY 2019, this expansion has come with a number of challenges, including high levels of absconders among recently enrolled family units. In FY 2019, the absconder rate for family units was 26.9 percent, more than double the 12.3 percent absconder rate for non-family unit participants, demonstrating the growing challenges such enrollments create for immigration enforcement. [Emphasis added.]

In this context, the absconder rate was determined by examining "the overall number of aliens who concluded the ATD program in a given time period ('overall terminations'), and the number of those terminations which occurred due to a participant absconding." In other words, when it came to family units, more than a quarter "terminat[ed]" the ATD program by disappearing.

Given the large size of this population as a whole, that is a significant failure of the monitoring program, providing support for the CBP Families and Children Care Panel's conclusion that Congress should give DHS "discretion to detain a close relative with a non-parent family member when this is in the best interest of the child."

Of course, this Congress (and in particular the Democrat-controlled House of Representatives) has no plans to do any such thing. In fact, as my former colleague Matt Sussis noted in February, the latest government funding bill actually increases funding for ATD while restricting detention. In particular, he reported that "the bill expands the ATD programs to 100,000 participants from 82,000, including over $40 million for 'family case management' to keep tabs on aliens who don't immediately abscond (as many do), but does not include money to actually find and remove those who do abscond." One would almost think that they set up the plan to fail.

And, almost as if following up on Sussis' statements, the report makes clear:

ERO lacks sufficient resources to keep all current [ATD] participants enrolled through the pendency of their proceedings, or to locate and arrest the significant number of participants who abscond, problems which will only be exacerbated by enrolling greater numbers of participants without the addition of enforcement resources. While ERO has continued to expand the use of ATD to monitor the non-detained population in FY 2019, the program will need to be further resourced in order to appropriately monitor participants, including through the addition of officers who can locate, arrest, and remove those who fail to adhere to conditions of enrollment.

It concludes with the obvious: "Finally, while additional resources would improve the efficacy of ATD at current levels of enrollment, ERO notes that the program is not a viable solution for addressing the magnitude of cases on the non-detained docket, which surpassed 3.2 million in FY 2019."

Put another way, ATD is ineffective and underfunded, not unlike the Woody Allen joke in Annie Hall about the resort where the food is terrible and the portions are too small. Given this, the arbitrary restrictions that courts have placed on ICE detention of family units, and the limited detention space and resources that are available to ERO, it is no wonder that ICE reports there were 595,430 fugitive aliens at the end of FY 2019.

I would have been more blunt and direct than ICE was about the failures and limitations of ATD, but then the agency will have to ask Congress for additional funding and therefore must be circumspect in its analysis, lestit perturb the appropriators who hold its purse strings. Respectfully, however, it is the American people who should be disturbed by findings in the agency's report.

The rest is here:
ICE Report: 'Alternatives to Detention' Don't Work - Immigration Blog

Michael Bloomberg entered the crowded 2020 Democratic primary race last month, reversing a decision he made earlier this year not to seek the presidency. Bloomberg served three terms as mayor of New York from 2002 to 2013, earning a reputation for being fiscally conservative and socially liberal.

Before entering public service, Bloomberg worked on Wall Street and founded Bloomberg LP, a financial services company that helped him amass an eye-popping personal fortune of $55.5 billion. A major philanthropist and climate change and gun control activist, Bloomberg is the eighth-richest person in the world.

Heres where Bloomberg stands on key issues in the 2020 presidential election.

Bloomberg raised property, income and sales taxes as mayor, turning the multi billion-dollar deficit he inherited after taking office in 2002 into a surplus by the time he stepped down in 2014. He boosted tourism, an important part of the New York economy, and rezoned large swaths of the city, paving the way for a major real estate boom. On his campaign website, Bloomberg claims his reforms created 400,000 new jobs in New York.

At the same time, Bloomberg drew heavy criticism for cutting spending, privatizing some city services, and failing to resolve labor disputes with unions seeking pay hikes. He once backed a plan to raise New York States minimum wage, but also vetoed city legislation aimed at raising wages for some workers with city contracts, angering critics who argued that Bloomberg was a billionaire technocrat disconnected from ordinary New Yorkers.

The former mayor has not yet released a detailed economic plan since launching his presidential run. His campaign website touts his economic record as mayor and says as president he would strengthen the middle class through policies that open the door of opportunity to every American. In a campaign ad, Bloomberg promised the wealthy will pay more in taxes, a position shared by several 2020 rivals, including progressive Sens. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and Bernie Sanders of Vermont.

In January Bloomberg criticized the Medicare-for-All proposal backed by several 2020 Democrats, saying the country could never afford that. Bloomberg told reporters at the time that the plan would cost trillions of dollars and bankrupt the U.S. According to his campaign website, Bloomberg supports expanding the Affordable Care Act and the existing Medicare program in order to achieve universal health care. The campaign has not released a detailed health care plan.

As mayor, Bloomberg banned smoking in bars and restaurants an initiative that his mayoral administration said helped prevent thousands of premature deaths. Bloomberg also banned large sugary drinks, though the move was struck down by the courts. Bloomberg also reduced childhood obesity in New York, by expanding healthy food standards for schools, requiring restaurants to post calorie counts on menus, and other measures. He also increased life expectancy among New Yorkers by three years, according to his campaign website.

During his tenure as mayor, Bloomberg reduced New York Citys carbon footprint by banning the dirtiest kinds of residential heating oil. Bloomberg also took other steps to promote energy efficiency and improve air quality, including retrofitting buildings, creating new park space and introducing a citywide bike-sharing program.

Bloomberg stepped up his focus on climate change after stepping down as mayor. In 2014, he was named the United Nations special envoy for cities and climate change. In 2018, Bloomberg was appointed as the U.N. special envoy for climate change. Bloomberg has also launched several climate change initiatives and spent heavily to promote action on the issue.

In 2017, Bloomberg pledged $64 million to help fund the Sierra Clubs Beyond Coal campaign to reduce pollution from coal-fired power plants. Earlier this year, Bloomberg said he would spend $500 million on an initiative run by his philanthropic organization aimed at creating a carbon-free U.S. economy.

Bloomberg has criticized Trumps record on climate change, including the presidents decision to withdraw the U.S. from the Paris Climate accord. Bloomberg has also criticized the Green New Deal, arguing the ambitious climate change plan could never pass Congress.

Bloomberg was a strong advocate for immigrants as mayor of New York. He supported initiatives to provide immigrants with legal aid in immigration cases and help in starting small businesses. Bloomberg also took steps to shield undocumented immigrants from deportation, including signing legislation that limited New York Citys cooperation with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

As mayor, Bloomberg expanded the use of foreign language translation in city services to helpnon-native English speakers, and frequently delivered public remarks in Spanish in a symbolic gesture to the citys large Hispanic population. He drew national attention in 2010 for a speech defending a controversial mosque project in Manhattan, known as the Ground Zero Mosque, in which he spoke out against religious intolerance and attacks on immigrants.

Bloomberg called for national immigration reform as mayor and has backed the cause since leaving office. He criticized President Donald Trumps immigration policies at a campaign stop shortly after launching his 2020 bid, saying the country needed more immigrants rather than less and calling the Trump administrations family separation policy a disgrace.

As mayor Bloomberg helped form the Mayors Against Illegal Guns group to push for gun safety measures. In 2014, Bloomberg launched Everytown for Gun Safety, a nonpartisan organization thats now one of the countrys leading gun control groups. Bloomberg pledged to spend $50 million to fund the group.

Bloomberg has made gun control a key issue in his 2020 presidential election. His campaign released a sweeping gun control plan earlier this month that would strengthen the federal background check system, ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, and provide more funding for law enforcement related to gun violence. The proposal also calls for a federal red flag law that would allow judges to remove guns from people deemed a danger to themselves or others.

Critics contend that Bloombergs push for safer gun control measures in cities is part of a mixed record on law enforcement and policing. As mayor Bloomberg supported a stop-and-frisk policing policy that advocates say unfairly targeted minorities. Bloomberg said last month that he was wrong on the issue and apologized.

Bloomberg does not have a lengthy foreign policy record. He has supported international free trade, and the United States relationship with Israel. In 2004, he appeared to signal support for the Iraq War in an appearance in New York alongside then-First Lady Laura Bush.

Since leaving office Bloomberg has elevated his role on the global stage through high-profile assignments for the U.N. and World Health Organization. Most of his international work has focused on combating climate change.

See original here:
What does Michael Bloomberg believe? Where the candidate stands on 6 issues - PBS NewsHour

We in the Golden State are delighted that the December Democratic presidential debate is to be hosted in our very own Los Angeles. We welcome the candidates and are happy to share a few things that Californians really want you to know before you arrive.

First, we think its just plain weird that your rules nearly resulted in a stage with just white contenders. The nation is slated to become majority people of color by around 2044 but California actually crossed that threshold in 1998. Were Americas future and we want the field to look more like tomorrow than yesterday.

So work on that. Maybe think about shuffling the order of which states go first, something Julin Castro (who will be forlornly looking on) has suggested. Or figure out how to jigger the rules so that being a billionaire is more of a liability than an advantage. You know the one person, one vote rather than one dollar, one vote thing.

Second, were deeply concerned about income inequality. Just like weve been America fast forward on demographic shifts our ethnic transformation between 1980 and 2000 mirrors the nations between 2000 and 2050 weve been way ahead on disparity. From being in the middle of the pack in terms of income gaps in 1969, we are now the fourth most unequal state in the union.

Were not proud of that and were hoping the next president can offer some answers. Improving the progressivity of our income tax system and implementing a wealth tax would help. So would raising the federal minimum wage so we dont stand out as a high-wage island. You might even consider a data dividend that is, funding a universal basic income by forcing tech companies to share the profits they make by mining the basic research we taxpayers fund and the consumer data we all provide.

Third, we are proud about another fact: that roughly one quarter of our residents are foreign-born and that approximately half of our children have at least one immigrant parent. We are also more than aware that immigrants contribute around one-third of our states GDP and that our economic problems worsened in the 1990s when we chose to scapegoat immigrants rather than develop strategies to counter deindustrialization.

So wed like you to not just firmly object to the rhetoric coming from the Trump administration but offer a positive agenda for immigrant integration. In our state, nearly 70 percent of those living without papers have been in the U.S. for more than a decade they are undocumented Californians. We need to prioritize immigration reform so they and their families can be safe and thrive.

Fourth, we are a bit chagrined to admit that we led on the over-incarceration binge. Between 1982 and 2008, the state prison population for the U.S. increased by two and a half times, but for California that number quadrupled. Driving those numbers was a toxic combination of a misguided war on drugs and a deeply embedded set of racist policing practices.

Were ready to make amends and have already passed a ballot measure that de-felonized drug use and made it possible for the formerly incarcerated to have some felony convictions reclassified as misdemeanors. You can help by adding your own voice to criminal justice reform and also by making a commitment to promote workforce development efforts that prioritize those re-entering our communities.

Fifth, lets talk about climate change. We believe in it indeed, we believe in it so much that we set our own ambitious goals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and move to 100 percent renewable energy. We were already on that course and its actually had bipartisan support (well, at least, former Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger) but the recent mix of raging wildfires and electrical blackouts has sort of sealed the deal on our conviction that this is serious business.

So get serious. Stop just talking about a Green New Deal spell out what the goals, funding, and mechanisms will be. Make a commitment to ensure that coal miners fare well through a transition, but also to protect farmworkers from increasing heat and address the persistent health issues of fence-line communities as we roll back on refineries.

Which gets to our sixth request: talk about environmental justice. After all, study after study shows that there are disparities in terms of exposures by race and income and that race is actually a more statistically significant and consistent predictor of disparity than class. Youll be on the right side of the facts climate change is real but so is the climate gap and there are political benefits as well.

Why? Despite the usual suppositions, polling in California shows that people of color particularly Latinos are far more concerned about climate change than whites. You want a broader coalition for that Green New Deal? Youll find it in the populations that have been getting a raw deal in terms of both economic and environmental opportunities

Seventh, talk about housing. Yes, we have a particularly acute problem with rent burden and high housing prices here in California, but once again were likely just a few steps ahead of the nation as a whole. While some of the analysis is a bit overblown, its clear we live in a knowledge economy where high-paid professionals cluster and price everyone else out.

In the Bay Area, for example, if a family with two earners each making $15 an hour a celebrated minimum wage we have yet to reach in the state was to lose their current apartment, they would only be able to move into five percent of the regions neighborhoods. The federal government needs to step up its investment and not just in voucher subsidies that get sopped up by private landlords but also in new forms of public or social housing.

Eighth, lay out a vision for the caring economy. By this we mean the share of our population that will need ongoing support from others. After all, our ethnic shift has dramatically slowed Californias mix of whites, African Americans, Latinos, Asian American Pacific Islanders and others will not change much in the next few decades. But guess what: were all getting older.

Again, jumping ahead of the country, roughly 11 percent of our population was 65 or older in 2010; by 2060, that number will rise to 26 percent. Were going to need more flex time and family leave and were going to need to train, develop and pay care workers, reversing the current pattern of low wages, inadequate protection and exploitation. One order of business: take our states Domestic Workers Bill of Rights and make it national.

Ninth, repair geographic divides. California has experienced a growing gap between our coastal and inland regions: in Fresno and Kern counties, for example, household incomes are less than half what they are in San Francisco and the Silicon Valley. Thats a problem for many reasons, including the fact that inland California the San Joaquin Valley and the so-called Inland Empire is home to just over a quarter of the states youth.

The Golden State is trying to close that gap with Regions Rise Together, an initiative that seeks to prioritize investment in areas so often left behind. Theres a lesson for you there. Wed love for you to support the coasts, but in a nation wracked by regional resentments, we also need you to develop your own analog to a Tennessee Valley Authority, the New Deal measure that incorporated a neglected part of America and helped to steady the tumultuous politics of that era.

Tenth, understand that change no matter how talented you may be as a candidate never really comes from the top. Our own state is a good example: our turn-around from the fiscal shortfalls that starved our educational system and our social safety net was largely the result of grassroots organizing that pushed our governor to support a progressive income tax.

So dont do what Obama did in 2008 dont fold up the organizing tent after you collect your votes. From the Womens March to Black Lives Matter to immigrant rights activists, America is enjoying a rebirth of social movements pushing the nation to the left. These groups can provide wind to your sails when youre right and hold you accountable when you come up short (yup, youll need that as well or, at least, we think you will).

Heres our final request: stop being scared of big, brave, progressive ideas. The country is in a deep constitutional crisis, riven by rising inequality, and seething with racial anxiety. Its not like weve been making headway with modest proposals. California has been able to push the envelope with bold initiatives on climate, immigrant rights, worker protection and so much more. The nation is waiting for you to do the same.

Dr. Manuel Pastor is a professor of sociology at the University of Southern California, where he also serves as director of the Program for Environmental and Regional Equity and the Center for the Study of Immigrant Integration. Dr. Pastors most recent book is State of Resistance: What Californias Dizzying Descent and Remarkable Resurgence Means for Americas Future.

Read this article:
What the Presidential Candidates Need to Know About California - Capital and Main

The Homeland Security Departments recently released Unified Agenda gives hope to U.S. tech workers that major, long overdue changes may be coming soon.

New DHS guidelines would provide relief to American tech specialists from the decades-long onslaught of overseas H-1B visa holders, L-1 visa international transfers and foreign-born Optional Practical Training (OPT) graduates with science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) degrees.

The H-1B, L-1 and OPT are visas that have displaced American workers or blocked them from employment consideration. The visas are popular vehicles for U.S. corporations and Indian IT services companies to add personnel and, at the expense of American workers, reduce their overhead.

A recent Forbes Magazine article, Trump Plans Far-Reaching Set of New Immigration Regulations, states that President Donald Trumps administrations specific goal regarding H-1B visas is to revise in other words, tighten the specialty occupation definition to better ensure that only the most qualified foreign nationals are granted visas.

To the surprise of many, some computer programming positions dont require foreign applicants to hold university degrees to qualify as a specialty occupation and receive an H-1B visa. The proposed H-1B ruling may be published this month.

The L-1 intracompany transfer visa, already approved in increasingly fewer numbers, is also under further review. Overseas employees, who may or may not have the alleged specialty skills they claim to hold, may be subject to more thorough scrutiny.

The L visa has no numerical cap, and employers are not required to prove that Americans are unavailable for the work. Neither do employers have to pay prevailing wage.

The Office of Inspector General found that the L-1 visa is particularly susceptible to fraud. Moreover, the L visa allows spouses and minor children to come to the United States on L-2 visas. In all, tens of thousands of L visa holders and their spouses work in the United States without any federal oversight. A September 2020 ruling is expected.

Another program that DHS hopes to corral is OPT that, without congressional approval, has morphed into the nations largest guest worker program. The term practical training should not be confused with actual on-the-job training, but rather means full-fledged work authorization.

DHS has allowed aliens who originally entered on student visas to stay over for years, without statutory authority, and take good jobs that might otherwise go to U.S. tech workers. As an additional incentive for students and their employers, both are exempt from payroll taxes.

Finally, the newest employment authorized but not congressionally approved work population, H-4 spouses of H-1B visa holders, are under renewed review. After years of intensive lobbying, spouses 90 percent Indian women holding H-4 visas were first granted work authorization documents during President Barack Obamas administration.

Trump has often expressed his intention to rescind work permission for the H-4 visa category, but has not achieved any notable progress. Whether H-4 spouses can legally be employed has been tied up in the courts for years. A DHS ruling may be issued in March 2020.

Immigration lawyers are apoplectic, and quite possibly unhinged, by the possible DHS overhaul. One prominent lawyer called Trumps employment-based visa revisions a white supremacist immigration agenda that would bar ... all immigrants of color. Other attorneys were equally outraged, but used more delicate language.

But hysteria aside, the H-1B, the L, OPT and H-4 have been relentless U.S. job killers, and all are unnecessary. No American worker shortage exists, only half of qualified STEM graduates find STEM careers, and no evidence exists of wage increases that would confirm worker shortages.

In their January report, Reforming U.S. High-Skilled Worker Program, authors Ron Hira and Bharath Gopalaswamy wrote that the current system undercuts opportunities for U.S. workers and enables exploitation of H-1B workers.

Since its creation in 1990, the H-1B program has never been fixed to meet Congress original promises to safeguard U.S. jobs. Instead, the program has been expanded to allow even larger numbers of H-1B workers, admitting them for longer periods, while its flawed governing rules have remained unchanged.

U.S. jobs should go to U.S. workers; to argue otherwise defies common sense.

Joe Guzzardi is an analyst and researcher with Progressives for Immigration Reform who now lives in Pittsburgh. He can be reached at [emailprotected], or follow him on Twitter: @joeguzzardi19. Click here to read previous columns. The opinions expressed are his own.

Follow this link:
Joe Guzzardi: Proposed H-1B Revisions Offer Ray of Hope to U.S. Tech Workers - Noozhawk