Visas Good Bad

ADI 2010 Peterson/Perry
1 Visas Aff/Neg
Table of Contents
Table of Contents..........................................................................................1 **Advantage Ev**..........................................................................................3 Protectionism Tanks Economy.....................................................................4 Illegal Employment Results in Atrocities......................................................5 Hard Power Bad...........................................................................................6 Families Have Right to Unite........................................................................7 **Temp Workers Aff Ev**..............................................................................8 H-2A Solve Displacement.............................................................................9 H-1Bs Attracts Intelligence..........................................................................10 High Skilled Visas Solve Technology/Jobs...................................................11 A2: H-1B Job Displacement.........................................................................12 Temp Visas Solve.........................................................................................13 Temp Visas Solve........................................................................................14 Temp Visas Solve.........................................................................................15 ***Temp Workers Neg***.............................................................................16 Temp Visas Cause Abuse.............................................................................17 Temp Visas Fail - Athletes...........................................................................18 Temp Visas Cause Unemployment..............................................................19 **Family Visas Aff**....................................................................................20 Immigration Reform Benefits GL Communities..........................................21 A2: K-1 Visa Waiting Times.........................................................................22 A2: V-Visa Wait Times................................................................................23 CSPA Protects Children..............................................................................24 A2: Immigration Flood...............................................................................25 Types of Family Visas are Unlimited/Limited.............................................26 Remittance Hurts US Econ .........................................................................27 **Family Visas Neg**...................................................................................28 K-3 Visas Fail..............................................................................................29 K-3 Visas Trade-Off....................................................................................30 Family Visas Fail Wait Time.....................................................................31 Visas Fail Unfair Laws.............................................................................32
2 Visas Aff/Neg
Visas Impede on Traditions........................................................................33 Family Visas Cause Illegal Immigration.....................................................34 **T-Visas Aff/Neg**.....................................................................................35 Uncapping T-Visas Solves...........................................................................36 T-Visas Fail Paranoia ..............................................................................37 **Work Immigrant Visas Good**................................................................38 Solves Wages..............................................................................................39 Solves Wages Extension.............................................................................40 Solves Innovation........................................................................................41 Solves Economy..........................................................................................42 **Work Immigrant Visas Bad**..................................................................43 Backlog kills solvency.................................................................................44 No Economic Solvency................................................................................45 Decreases Wages........................................................................................46 **Misc**......................................................................................................47 Health Care Solves Econ.............................................................................48 Health Care Solves Econ Ext.......................................................................49 Backlog Causes Illegal Immigration...........................................................50
3 Visas Aff/Neg
**Advantage Ev**
4 Visas Aff/Neg
Protectionism Tanks Economy

Protectionism bad, causes closed economy and stagnation Friedman 9
(internationally renowned author, reporter, and columnistthe recipient of three Pulitzer Prizes and the author of five bestselling books February 11, 2009 OP-ED COLUMNIST The Open-Door Bailout By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN Bangalore, India) HRL If you do this, it will be one of the best things for India and one of the worst for Americans, [because] Indians will be forced to innovate at home, said Subhash B. Dhar, a member of the executive council that runs Infosys, the well-known Indian technology company that sends Indian workers to the U.S. to support a wide range of firms. We protected our jobs for many years and look where it got us. Do you know that
for an Indian company, it is still easier to do business with a company in the U.S. than it is to do business today with another Indian state? Each Indian state tries to protect its little economy with its own rules. America should not be trying to copy that. Your attitude, said Dhar, should be whoever can make us competitive and dominant, lets bring them in. If there is one thing we know for absolute certain, its this: Protectionism did not cause the Great Depression, but it sure helped to make it Great. From 1929 to 1934, world trade plunged by more than 60 percent and we were all worse off.
5 Visas Aff/Neg
Illegal Employment Results in Atrocities

Illegal employment leads to atrocities Griffith 9
(Kati L. Griffith CORNELL UNIVERSITY, ILR SCHOOL, Ithaca, New York Assistant Professor of Employment and Labor Law. UNITED STATES: U.S. MIGRANT WORKER LAW: THE INTERSTICES OF IMMIGRATION LAW AND LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT LAW Comparative Labor Law & Policy Journal Comparative Labor Law & Policy Journal Fall, 2009 31 Comp. Lab. L. & Pol'y J. 125) HRL
The work visa program for temporary foreign workers in the United States is "not only the longest-running, but also the largest such program in n1 the world." Close to one million foreign workers receive work visas each year for both skilled and unskilled temporary jobs in the United States. Nevertheless, the number of foreign workers laboring in the United states that do not have the legal documentation necessary to work in the United States ("undocumented migrant workers") dwarfs the number of temporary foreign workers that receive visas to work in the United States ("documented migrant workers"). As of 2008, there were an estimated 8.3 million, mostly low-wage and lown2
skilled, undocumented migrant workers in the U.S. labor force. n3 Some estimates suggest that the number of undocumented migrant workers in the United States may be even higher. n4 Thus, when discussing "migrant worker law," the laws that affect undocumented migrant workers deserve special attention in the U.S. context. [*126] Migrant workers, both documented and undocumented, are currently the subject of a significant amount of debate in the United State. Some of the concern centers on the treatment of low-wage migrant workers in low-skill occupations. A host of new studies and reports graphically depict how low-wage migrant workers too often work in unsafe conditions and suffer severe mistreatment from their employers. n5 For example, a New York Times article revealed a host of
alleged labor abuses that came to light in the aftermath of a large-scale immigration raid at a meatpacking company in May 2008. The immigration raid resulted in the arrest of hundreds of workers suspected of using fraudulent documents to obtain employment. n6 A search warrant issued before the immigration raid detailed one occasion when "a floor supervisor had blindfolded an immigrant
[worker] with duct tape" and "then took one of the meat hooks and hit the [worker] with it." n7 While the incident reportedly did not result in "serious injuries" it represented the tip of the iceberg of alleged labor and employment law violations. n8 Immigration agents also identified child workers, "some as young as 13." n9 These children reported that they were working "shifts of twelve hours or more wielding razor-edged knives and saws to slice freshly killed beef." n10 Other alleged labor and employment violations included complaints from migrant meatpackers of discrimination, sexual harassment, and wage and hour violations. n11
6 Visas Aff/Neg
Hard Power Bad

Increasing military leadership is dangerous as a basis for policy. Not key to US global leadership. Conry, 97 (Barbara, Foreign policy analyst at the Cato Institute, http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-267.html) JS
"Global leadership" has gained increasing prominence as a guiding principle for American foreign policy. Yet the concept itself remains largely unexamined. Although "leadership" sounds benign, today's proponents of global leadership envision a role for the United States that resembles that of a global hegemon--with the risks and costs hegemony entails. Global political and military
leadership is inadequate, even dangerous, as a basis for policy. The vagueness of "leadership" allows policymakers to rationalize dramatically different initiatives and makes defining policy difficult. Taken to an extreme, global leadership implies U.S. interest in and responsibility for virtually anything, anywhere. Global leadership also entails immense costs and risks. Much of the $265 billion defense budget is spent to support U.S. aspirations to lead the world, not to defend the United States.
There are also human costs. Moreover, it is an extremely risky policy that forces U.S. involvement in numerous situations unrelated to American national security. There are no concrete benefits that justify the costs
and risks of U.S. global leadership. Advocates' claims that leadership enables Washington to persuade
U.S. allies to assume costs the United States would otherwise bear alone and that failure on the part of the United States to lead would cause global chaos do not hold up under scrutiny. There are several alternatives to global leadership, including greater reliance on regional security organizations and the creation of spheres of influence or regional balance-
of-power arrangements. The United States would then act as a balancer of last resort. Such a strategy would preserve U.S. security without the costs and risks of an unrealistic crusade to lead the world. Increasing U.S. hard pwer bad. Increases anti-US ideology, destroys counties, decreases US economy Messerli 9 (Joe. Balanced Politics Author. http://www.balancedpolitics.org/world_policeman.htm) JS It could increase an already growing anti-American sentiment around the world.
We could make many wrong decisions (e.g. when we armed & financed Saddam Hussein). U.S. soldiers would be put in harm's way. Civilians would be killed on many of the missions. Much of a country could be destroyed in a
liberation attempt. The financial cost of being a world policeman is extremely high. People from other countries have different cultures & values; thus, we must respect the rights of those citizens to determine
their own government.
7 Visas Aff/Neg
Families Have Right to Unite

Families have the right to unity, covered by international law.
Jastram 2003
(Katie Jastram, University of California, Berkeley, Family Unity: The New Geography of Family Life May 2003 < http://www.migrationinformation.org/feature/display.cfm?ID=118>) KC
A family's right to live together is protected by international human rights and humanitarian law. There is universal consensus that, as the fundamental unit of society, the family is entitled to respect, protection, assistance, and support. A right to family unity is inherent in recognizing the family as a group unit. The right to marry and found a family also includes the right to maintain a family life together. The right to a shared family life draws additional support from the prohibition against arbitrary interference with the family. Finally, states have recognized that children have a right to live with their parents. Both the father and
the mother, irrespective of their marital status, have common responsibilities as parents and share the right and responsibility to participate equally in the upbringing and development of their children.
Interest of dependents should be strongest reason families stay together.

Jastram 2003
(Katie Jastram, University of California, Berkeley, Family Unity: The New Geography of Family Life May 2003 < http://www.migrationinformation.org/feature/display.cfm?ID=118>) KC Equally defining will be the efforts of families to reunite through migration, and the ways in which states will choose to respond. The
rights on which family unity is based are often qualified with provisions for the state to limit the right under certain circumstances. It should be noted, however, that the most important, and sometimes only, qualifier is the imperative to act in the best interests of the child. The nature of the family relationship shapes the right to family unity, with minor dependent children and their parents having the strongest claim to remain together or to be reunited. Maintaining the unity of an intact family poses different issues than reconstituting a separated family.
Finally, the immigration status of the various family members has an impact on how the right to family unity should be implemented.
US is founded on immigrant families and their unity.

Integrity Legal 2009
(Integrity Legal Law Firm, immigration law firm and blog, The Current State of US Family Immigration October 30, 2009 http://integrity-legal.com/legal-blog/tag/us-family-immigration/) KC The United States of America is a nation founded by Immigrants and the descendants of Immigrants. US Family Immigration is one of the most important aspects of the American Immigration system as it helps bind multinational families to the United States of America. In a recent article in the Immigration Impact blog, issues correlating to US Family Immigration were discussed at length. Below are some of the ideas conveyed regarding the system of bringing families together in the USA: The U.S. immigration system has always promoted family unity by awarding the
majority of visas to the families of current U.S. residents, which ensures that close family members are not kept apart. The principle of family unity has long been a central tenet of our immigration laws and has contributed to the economic and social prosperity of our country and immigrant populations.
8 Visas Aff/Neg
**Temp Workers Aff Ev**
9 Visas Aff/Neg
H-2A Solve Displacement

H-2A visas protect American workers from job displacement Shaver 9
(Jessica Shaver Immigration Lawyer Copyright (c) 2009 Georgetown Immigration Law Journal Georgetown Immigration Law Journal Fall, 2009 24 Geo. Immigr. L.J. 97) HRL
the DOL proposed a rule called "Temporary Agricultural Employment of H-2A Aliens in the U.S.," which was published in the Federal Register on September 4, 2009. n27In describing the need for new rule making, the
DOL noted that "the policy underpinnings of the 2008 Final Rule, e.g. streamlining the H-2A regulatory process to defer many determinations of program compliance until after an Application has been fully adjudicated, do not provide an adequate level of [*100] protection for either U.S. n28 or foreign workers." The Department, noting the INA's purpose of protecting U.S. workers even while enabling the importation of foreign workers, "believes
that its statutory mandate justifies returning to the previous methodology as it better ensures U.S. workers are not adversely affected." n29 Under the new rule, employers are only to hire foreign workers if "there are demonstrably no available domestic workers for these jobs." n30 To ensure American workers are given the first shot at these jobs, the new rule would require, for the first time, that these jobs be posted on an electronic job registry. n31 In addition, the new rule would require farmers to once again submit documentation to prove they tried to hire American workers first. n32 After the 2008 rule
change, farmers were only required to attest to this effort, relying heavily on "post-adjudication integrity measures to review selected n33 documentation from a percentage of employers to compensate for a lack of hands-on review."
10 Visas Aff/Neg
H-1Bs Attracts Intelligence

An open and flexible economy is best: H-1B visas attract brain power. Friedman 9
(internationally renowned author, reporter, and columnistthe recipient of three Pulitzer Prizes and the author of five bestselling books February 11, 2009 OP-ED COLUMNIST The Open-Door Bailout By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN Bangalore, India) HRL
Leave it to a brainy Indian to come up with the cheapest and surest way to stimulate our economy: immigration. All you need to do is grant visas to two million Indians, Chinese and Koreans, said Shekhar Gupta, editor of The Indian Express newspaper. We will buy up all the subprime homes. We will work 18 hours a day to pay for them. We will immediately improve your savings rate no Indian bank today has more than 2 percent nonperforming loans because not paying your mortgage is considered shameful here. And we will start new companies to create our own jobs and jobs for more Americans.While his tongue was slightly in cheek, Gupta and many other Indian business people I spoke to this week were trying to make a point that sometimes non-Americans can make best: Dear America, please
remember how you got to be the wealthiest country in history. It wasnt through protectionism, or stateowned banks or fearing free trade. No, the formula was very simple: build this really flexible, really open economy, tolerate creative destruction so dead capital is quickly redeployed to better ideas and companies, pour into it the most diverse, smart and energetic immigrants from every corner of the world and then stir and repeat, stir and repeat, stir and repeat, stir and repeat.
While I think President Obama has been doing his best to keep the worst protectionist impulses in Congress out of his stimulus plan, the
U.S. Senate unfortunately voted on Feb. 6 to restrict banks and other financial institutions that receive taxpayer bailout money from hiring high-skilled immigrants on temporary work permits known as H-1B visas. Bad signal. In an age when attracting the first-round intellectual draft choices from around the world is the most important competitive advantage a knowledge economy can have, why would we add barriers against such brainpower anywhere? Thats called Old Europe. Thats spelled: S-T-U-P-I-D.
11 Visas Aff/Neg
High Skilled Visas Solve Technology/Jobs

Attracting smart people best way to create jobs and further technology Friedman 9
(internationally renowned author, reporter, and columnistthe recipient of three Pulitzer Prizes and the author of five bestselling books February 11, 2009 OP-ED COLUMNIST The Open-Door Bailout By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN Bangalore, India) HRL We live in a technological age where every study shows that the
more knowledge you have as a worker and the more knowledge workers you have as an economy, the faster your incomes will rise. Therefore, the centerpiece of our stimulus, the core driving principle, should be to stimulate everything that makes us smarter and attracts more smart people to our shores. That is the best way to create good jobs. According to research by Vivek Wadhwa, a senior research associate at the Labor and Worklife Program at Harvard Law School, more than half of Silicon Valley start-ups were founded by immigrants over the last decade. These immigrant-founded tech companies employed 450,000 workers and had sales of $52 billion in 2005, said Wadhwa in an essay published this week on BusinessWeek.com. He also cited a recent study by William R. Kerr of Harvard Business School and William F. Lincoln of the University of Michigan that found that in periods when H-1B visa numbers went down, so did patent applications filed by immigrants [in the U.S.]. And when H-1B visa numbers went up, patent applications followed suit. We dont want to come out of this crisis with just inflation, a mountain of debt and more shovel-ready jobs. We want to we have to come out of it with a new Intel, Google, Microsoft and Apple. I would have loved to have seen the stimulus package include a government-funded venture capital
bank to help finance all the start-ups that are clearly not starting up today in the clean-energy space theyre dying like flies because of a lack of liquidity from traditional lending sources. Newsweek had an essay this week that began: Could Silicon Valley become another Detroit? Well, yes, it could. When the best brains in the world are on sale, you dont shut
them out. You open your doors wider. We need to attack this financial crisis with green cards not just greenbacks, and with start-ups not just bailouts. One Detroit is enough.
12 Visas Aff/Neg
A2: H-1B Job Displacement

H-1B do NOT detriment American jobs or wages Sherk Nguyen 9
(Restricting H-1B Visas Is Bad for Business and the Economy Published on May 13, 2009 by James Sherk and Diem Nguyen - is Bradley Fellow in Labor Policy in the Center for Data Analysis at The Heritage Foundation and Diem Nguyen is a Research Assistant in the Douglas and Sarah Allison Center for Foreign Policy Studies, a division of the Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for International Studies, at The Heritage Foundation. http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2009/05/Restricting-H-1B-VisasIs-Bad-for-Business-and-the-Economy) HRL
Many believe H-1B workers merely compete with Americans looking for work. They are wrong. The U.S. workforce is not a "zero-sum game." One hired H-1B worker does not mean an American is out of a job. In fact, the National Foundation for American Policy found that employers hired four new American workers for each new H-1B employee they hire.
Additionally, hiring
H-1B employees does not lower the wages of American workers. Current law requires that when employers apply for H-1B visas, they must attest that they will pay the visa recipient the same wage they would pay an American with similar skill sets. Rather than limiting the ability of employers to hire H-1B workers by adding more rules and restrictions, Congress should ensure the federal government exercises appropriate oversight in enforcing current laws.
13 Visas Aff/Neg
Temp Visas Solve

Increasing temporary-workers reduces illegal immigration, jumpstarts the economy, and solves job shortages. Griswold 10 (Daniel, Director of the Cato Institute's Center for Trade Policy Studies, http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=11718) JS
The evidence favoring immigration reform is stark in a way that ought to appeal to Republicans. A
robust temporary-worker program would reduce illegal immigration and add billions of dollars in productivity to the U.S. economy. Without immigration reform, the problem of illegal immigration will only grow worse as the U.S. labor market slowly recovers from the recession. The number of illegal immigrants in the United States has dropped to 11 million from its peak in 2007, but it will likely begin to grow again as demand for less-skilled workers picks up with the economy. The economic and demographic realities that have fueled illegal immigration are still in place. In normal years, the U.S. economy produces hundreds of thousands of new jobs in retail, landscaping, food preparation and service, and home and commercial cleaning, all of which attract immigrants with limited job skills. At the same time, the number of nativeborn Americans satisfied with such jobs continues to decline as the population becomes
older and better-educated. The number of adult Americans without a high school diploma is expected to drop by another two to three million over the next decade. Yet our immigration system offers no means for a
sufficient number of foreign-born workers to enter the country legally and fill that gap. So they enter illegally. The key to reducing illegal immigration will be a strong temporary-worker program. This has been the missing ingredient of past efforts. Increasing temporary-worker visas sharply reduces illegal immigration Griswold 10 (Daniel, Director of the Cato Institute's Center for Trade Policy Studies, http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=11718) JS
We know from experience that expanding
opportunities for legal immigration can sharply reduce illegal immigration. In the 1950s, Congress dramatically expanded the number of temporary-worker visas through the Bracero Program. The result was a 95 percent drop in arrests at the border. If Mexican and Central American workers know they can enter the country legally to fill jobs, they will be far less likely to enter illegally. Temporary-Visa programs reduce terrorism and illegal immigration. Griswold 10 (Daniel, Director of the Cato Institute's Center for Trade Policy Studies, http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=11718) JS A workable temporary-visa program would allow border agents to concentrate their efforts on intercepting real criminals and terrorists at the border. It would also reduce the temptation to hire illegal workers, in turn reducing the need to raid workplaces and impose national ID cards, employment verification systems, and other burdens on American citizens.
14 Visas Aff/Neg
Temp Visas Solve

Low-skilled workers are key to U.S. Economy. Only temporary-worker visas solve. Griswold 7 (Daniel, Director of the Cato Institute's Center for Trade Policy Studies, http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?
pub_id=10659) JS Skeptics of immigration reform point to the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act as evidence that reform and legalization cannot work. The 1986 act contained two major provisions: It offered "legal permanent resident" status (i.e., a "green card") to 2.7 million illegal workers who had entered the country before 1982 and to certain agricultural workers, and it significantly ramped up enforcement efforts, including making it illegal for the first time in U.S. history for employers to knowingly hire illegal workers. Notably missing from IRCA, however, was any provision
to expand the opportunity for low-skilled workers to enter the country legally. The pool of illegal workers was drained temporarily by the amnesty, but it soon began to fill up again as the economic pull of the U.S. labor market overwhelmed even the stepped-up enforcement efforts. IRCA failed to recognize the reality that low-skilled workers play an important and legitimate role in the U.S. economy. Large-scale illegal immigration will end only when America's immigration system offers a legal alternative. If foreignborn workers are allowed to enter the country by a safe, orderly, and legal path, the number choosing to enter illegally will drop sharply. When given the choice
of paying a smuggler $2,000, risking robbery and death in the desert, and living a shadowy existence in the underground U.S. economy, unable to leave and return freely to visit home, or entering the United States through a legal port of entry with legal documents, enjoying the full responsibility and protection of the law, and the freedom to visit home without fear of being denied reentry, the large majority of potential entrants will chose the legal path.
History proves a temporary-worker program solves for illegal immigration Griswold 7 (Daniel, Director of the Cato Institute's Center for Trade Policy Studies, http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?
pub_id=10659) JS
We know from experience that legal immigration, if allowed, will crowd out illegal immigration. In the 1950s, the Bracero program allowed Mexican workers to enter the country
temporarily, typically to work on farms in the Southwest. Early in that decade, illegal immigration was widespread because the program offered an insufficient number of visas to meet the labor demands of a growing U.S. economy. Instead of merely redoubling efforts to enforce a flawed law, Congress dramatically increased the number
of visas to accommodate demand. The result: apprehensions of illegal entrants at the border soon dropped by more than 95 percent. Back then, as we could expect now, foreign-born workers rationally chose the legal path to entry when it was available. When the Bracero program was abolished in 1964, illegal immigration began an inexorable rise that continues to this day. At least 400,000 temporary-visas must be increased to sustain the job market. Anything less guarantees illegal immigration will increase. Griswold 7 (Daniel, Director of the Cato Institute's Center for Trade Policy Studies, http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?
pub_id=10659) JS If the goal is to curb illegal immigration, any temporary worker program must offer a sufficient number of visas to meet the legitimate demands of a growing U.S. labor market. The fact that 400,000 to 500,000 foreign
born workers join the U.S. labor force each year indicates the general magnitude by which the demand for exceeds the supply of available, legal workers. A temporary worker program should offer at least that number of visas to allow the revealed demand of American employers to be met legally. Capping the number of visas much below that level will be self-defeating. In May 2006, the
Senate approved an amendment offered by Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) that would have reduced the annual number of temporary visas to 200,000. That number would still leave a large number of jobs in the United States without sufficient legal workers available to fill them. A similar cap this time around will almost certainly guarantee a
continued inflow of illegal workers, defeating one of the central goals of immigration reform.
15 Visas Aff/Neg
Temp Visas Solve

Increasing visa eligibility does not mean a flood of immigrants will overwhelm the US. History, economic caps, and circularity migration prove Griswold 7 (Daniel, Director of the Cato Institute's Center for Trade Policy Studies, http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?
pub_id=10659) JS
Fears that the United States will be overwhelmed by a "flood" of immigrants if the temporary visa numbers are not tightly capped are unfounded. First, legalization does not necessarily mean more immigrants entering the United States. The most likely consequence of a temporary worker program, as with expansion of the Bracero program in the 1950s, would be the transformation of an illegal flow into a legal flow. The number of workers entering the country illegally has already been effectively "capped" by the demand in the U.S. labor market. If there are not jobs available, the workers will not come. Second, a workable legalization program could be expected to restore the traditional circularity of Mexican migration to the United States, increasing the number of foreign- born workers who leave the country after a temporary period of work. Many low-skilled
workers enter the U.S. labor market to solve temporary problems back home. They send remittances home to help pay medical bills, upgrade housing, raise capital for a business, or smooth the family's income during an economic downturn. Once such goals are achieved, a large share of workers has chosen in the past to return home. On the basis of that experience, we could expect that an increase in the number of workers entering the country after legalization would be largely or wholly offset by an increase in the number leaving. Third, any fears of "chain migration" can be addressed by restricting the ability of immigrants to sponsor extended family members. One possible compromise would be to restrict or eliminate quotas for parents, adult siblings, and adult children of legal permanent residents in the United States. The ability to sponsor relatives could be limited to the "nuclear family" of spouses and minor children. The result would be to allow nuclear families to remain intact, while at the same time incrementally moving the U.S. immigration system from one that is primarily family based to one that is employment based.
Chain migration claims are exaggerated. Griswold 7 (Daniel, Director of the Cato Institute's Center for Trade Policy Studies, http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?
pub_id=10659) JS
Fears about chain migration tend to be exaggerated. A Web Memo published in May 2006 by Robert Rector of the Heritage Foundation estimated that the original version of the Senate immigration reform bill, S. 2611, would increase U.S. immigration by a whopping 103 million during the next 20 years. But we know from our experience with the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act that nothing like a flood of new immigration occurred.
16 Visas Aff/Neg
***Temp Workers Neg***
17 Visas Aff/Neg
Temp Visas Cause Abuse

Temporary work visas force immigrants to remain in abusive job conditions Tripathi 9
RAGINI TRIPATHI* Copyright (c) 2009 The Scholar: St. Mary's Law Review on Minority Issues The Scholar: St. Mary's Law Review on Minority Issues Spring, 2009 11 SCHOLAR 519
Under current law, it is extremely difficult for many employment-based visa-holders to change jobs, because immigration status is frequently conditioned on continued employment by the sponsoring employer. Even where available, the legal process for switching employers is cumbersome. As a result, many temporary workers in existing visa programs endure extreme exploitation and abuse by their employers rather than forfeiting their immigration status. Yet labor scholars well understand the necessity of a genuine
"right of exit" from an employment relationship, if individual liberty is to be preserved. This is the promise of the Thirteenth Amendment, which itself secures a principle far older than the Civil War. Although temporary workers may have the formal option to leave
exploitative and dangerous jobs, the reality is often that one cannot risk the termination of visa status and loss of costly investments in travel, visa fees, and other expenses, when work authorization is not portable. ... Denying portability to temporary workers thus confers on employers a dramatic coercive power. Preserving a genuine right of exit, by contrast, will be indispensable in allowing future temporary workers to exercise their rights to organize, to their certified wages, to a safe workplace, to be free from unlawful discrimination, and to other legal rights. Id. at 1455-57 (footnotes omitted).
18 Visas Aff/Neg
Temp Visas Fail - Athletes

Short time limits fail, deters professional athletes careers Bragun 8
(Magdalena Bragun + Judicial Extern, Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, Judge Richard Tallman Legal Intern, Federal Aviation Administration: Office of Regional Counsel Legal Advocate, Northwest Immigrant Rights Project Legal Intern, Polish Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Represents Wells Fargo and Nordstrom etc. Copyright (c) 2008 The Seattle University Law Review Seattle University Law Review Summer, 2008 22 Geo. Immigr. L.J. 715) HRL
Professional athletes are authorized to come to the United States as temporary nonimmigrant workers under the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1990. n19 Specifically, professional hockey players must seek classification as an "Internationally Recognized Athletes" under the Act, a classification more commonly known as "P1 status." n20 To obtain P-1 status, a hockey player must establish that he is "internationally recognized" and is coming to the United States, with no intention of abandoning his foreign residence, for the purpose of performing on a team. n21 To meet
this standard, a hockey player must obtain a valid contract with a major U.S. sports franchise and provide documentation that he meets two of n22 seven listed criterion evidencing his level of international acclaim. Generally speaking, any hockey player with an NHL
contract who plays for on a professional level will have no problem meeting the requirements to receive [*720] P-1 status. n23 An approved P-1 petition provides an athlete with an initial grant of five years of valid status and work authorization in the United States. n24 This initial grant can be extended until the athlete has spent a total of ten years in P-1 status. n25 The clock starts running as soon as the athlete enters the U.S. in P-1 status and applies whether the athlete is playing at a major-league or minor-league level. n26 Simply put, a professional athlete in P-1 status has a maximum of ten years of time in the United States. This ten-year limit poses a problem because it encompasses playing time at both the minor and major league levels, and many players will spend several years playing for a minor-league team before developing the necessary skills and experience needed to compete in the NHL. n27 It is inevitable that some foreign-born NHL players will want to stay in the
United States for the duration of their careers and long after. Those wishing to stay in the United States permanently must seek an employmentn28 based immigrant visa under the INA.
19 Visas Aff/Neg
Temp Visas Cause Unemployment

Increasing H-1B visas causes unemployment. Miano 8 (John. Founder of the Programmers Guild. http://www.cis.org/H1bVisaNumbers)
As the annual H-1B quota gets exhausted, industry groups claim that the huge number of H-1B visa applications demonstrates that more H-1B visas should be available. However, comparing the number of H-1B
visas in their largest represented occupations (computers and engineering) to the number of jobs
created in those occupations presents a different picture of the H-1B visa program. This study examines the relationship between the number of H-1B visas and job growth. It finds that the number of H-1B visas
approved in these fields greatly exceeds any reasonable number reflected by economic demand. Key Findings There is no cause and effect relationship between H-1B visas and job creation. Adding H-1B visas does not create additional jobs for U.S. workers. Since 1999, the United States has approved enough H-1B visas for computer workers to fill 87 percent of net computer job growth over that period. Since 1999, the United States has had a net loss of 76,000 engineering jobs. Over the same time period, the United States has approved an average of 16,000 new H-1B visas each year for engineers. Increasing H-1B visas do not produce job creation Miano 8 (John JD. J Founder of the Programmers Guild. http://www.cis.org/H1bVisaNumbers) There have been published claims that H-1B visas create jobs. Both the Wall Street Journal and The Economist have asserted on their editorial pages that each H-1B visa creates five additional jobs. If that kind of relationship existed, the H-1B program should be creating around 500,000 to 1,000,000 new jobs a year. This alleged job creation is so large that it would be immediately apparent in the data. It simply is not there. Statistically, there is no linear correlation whatsoever between H-1B visas and job growth. A graph provides a good illustration. Figure 2 shows the annual growth in employment compared to
the number of jobs H-1B should be creating if the kind of relationship claimed by the Wall Street Journal and The Economist existed. The trend in the data is the opposite of that claimed.9 Growth in H-1B visas
has corresponded with decreases in employment growth. This is not to say the data show H1B visas cause job creation to decrease. Rather, it shows that H-1B visas do not produce job creation and, most importantly, that H-1B usage is not self-correcting to economic demand Increasing U.S. hard hegemony bad. Increases anti-US ideology, destroys counties, decreases US economy Messerli 9 (Joe. Balanced Politics Author. http://www.balancedpolitics.org/world_policeman.htm) JS It could increase an already growing anti-American sentiment around the world.
We could make many wrong decisions (e.g. when we armed & financed Saddam Hussein). U.S. soldiers would be put in harm's way. Civilians would be killed on many of the missions. Much of a country could be destroyed in a
liberation attempt. The financial cost of being a world policeman is extremely high. People from other countries have different cultures & values; thus, we must respect the rights of those citizens to determine
their own government.
20 Visas Aff/Neg
**Family Visas Aff**
21 Visas Aff/Neg
Immigration Reform Benefits GL Communities

Laws are changing to benefit multiple forms of couples.
Gibson 2010
(Jake Gibson, Fox News Reporter, House Democrats insert Gay Rights into Immigration Debate July 15, 2010 < http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/07/15/house-democrats-insert-gay-rights-immigration-debate/>) KC House Democrats
are trying to broaden support for immigration reform by reaching out to the gay and lesbian community with a provision in immigration legislation that would allow gay and lesbian Americans to bring foreign partners home to the United States. Under current law, American citizens and other legal permanent residents can get a green card or immigrant visa for a spouse or immediate family members living abroad. However, the same rights do not extend to same-sex couples living in the country. During a news conference on Capitol Hill Thursday, Democratic Reps. Jerrold Nadler of New York, Luis Gutierrez of Illinois and Mike Honda of California, among others, urged Congress to pass the Uniting American Families Act as part of a comprehensive immigration reform package this year. "Right now too many same-sex, binational couples face an impossible choice," said Gutierrez, who sits on the House Judiciary Committee's immigration subcommittee, "to live apart or to break the law to be with partners, their families and children." Government should never engage in purposeless, gratuitous cruelty and we should stop it," Nadler said.
22 Visas Aff/Neg
A2: K-1 Visa Waiting Times

K-1 Visas have short waiting times.
Saborio 2009
(Art Saborio, Immigration reporter, K-1 Visa Truths and Myths July 7, 2009 < http://ezinearticles.com/?K1-Visa-Truths-and-Myths&id=2622421>) KC
The first truth or myth - It takes a year or more to get a immigration K1 Visa. This is a myth. If done correctly you can easily get a immigration K1 Visa within four to six months. Depending on the country that the immigrant fianc(e) is coming from, the marriage visa could be completed even sooner. I had a case
where the fianc was coming from Argentina. It only took six weeks for the paperwork to get processed and K1 Visa granted to the immigrant fiance. It all depends on the country and amount of applications being processed for that country. If your fianc/Fiance is coming from Russia, Europe or any former Soviet State, then you can expect the average time to be between four and six months.
23 Visas Aff/Neg
A2: V-Visa Wait Times

V-visas allow families to live in the US while waiting for visa availability.
Messerly 2009
(Ernest Messerly, Immigration Lawyer, Visa Victory September 10, 2009 http://immigration.lawyers.com/blogs/archives/2089-V-VisaVictory.html) KC The nonimmigrant V visa is commonly thought of as a thing of the past. But very recently I was fortunate enough to be able to rescue two clients from seemingly hopeless situations in which they had been illegal for years by means of the V visa. Briefly, the V visa was
created to allow family members of lawful permanent residents to reside legally in the US while waiting for an immigrant visa to become available. Since family members of lawful permanent residents often have many years to wait before an immigrant visa becomes available, the V visa allows for family unification, allowing the family members to wait for visa availability in the US rather than in the native country. However, the law that created the V visa requires that family member be the beneficiary of a petition filed on or before December 21, 2000. Because of the required filing date, there are few situations where a V visa is
now available. When USCIS initially implemented the rules and regulations for the V visa, they took the position that a child would lose their V visa eligibility at age 21.
24 Visas Aff/Neg
CSPA Protects Children

CSPA helps immigration laws protect children of marriage visas.
Perez 2010
(Susan Perez, Immigration Lawyer, The Child Status Protection Act (CSPA) June 19, 2010 http://immigration.lawyers.com/blogs/archives/6630-The-Child-Status-Protection-Act-CSPA.html) KC Since I started practicing immigration law, Ive been receiving a lot of inquiries regarding the Child Status Protection Act. Some believed that their children had aged out at age 18. Our immigration laws define a child as an unmarried individual
under 21 years of age. The Child Status Protection Act (CSPA) does not change this definition, but changes the point at which the childs age is calculated. The CSPA was enacted to provide relief to children who had aged out due to delays in processing of visa petitions. The CSPA freezes the age of the child at a certain point and preserves the status as child until the visa becomes available. A lot of articles have
been written about the CSPA, but this remains to be a puzzle not only to ordinary people but even to lawyers. This is because the CSPA is complex and there are a number of unresolved issues. Up to now, there are no regulations implementing the CSPA. USCIS merely relies on interpretative memoranda and some of these interpretations are narrow and against granting benefits to aliens. The simplest case is the
child of a U.S. citizen. Maria is 20 years old. Her U.S. citizen (USC) mother filed an I-130 petition today. The CSPA freezes the age of a child of a USC parent on the date that the USC parent files an I-130 visa petition for the child. In Marias case, she will remain a child even if her visa number becomes available when shes 25 years old. This rule holds true even to stepchildren. But in the case of a stepchild, there is a special rule that the marriage between the biological parent and USC stepparent must have occurred before the stepchilds 18th birthday. The difficult CSPA cases involve petitions made by parents who are legal permanent residents (LPR). Maria is 18 years old when her LPR mother filed an I130 petition. Marias preference category is F2A or child of an LPR. When Maria turned 20 years old, her mother became a naturalized U.S. citizen. Marias age will freeze on the date of her mothers naturalization. Since Maria was under 21 when her mother naturalized, Marias petition will be converted into immediate relative category. As such, she does not have to wait for her priority date to become current. Moreover, she retains
her status as child even if she is over 21 when her visa becomes available. Assuming Maria got married at age 18. Her USC mother filed an I130 when Maria was 20 years old. A few months after the mother filed the I-130 petition, Marias annulment of marriage became final. Marias age will freeze on the date when her annulment became final. If Maria was under 21 when this occurred, the petition will be converted to an immediate relative petition. Maria retains her status as child even if she is over 21 when her visa becomes available.
25 Visas Aff/Neg
A2: Immigration Flood

Family visas dont create a surge of immigrants Moore and Anderson 97
(Stephen Moore and Stuart Anderson, Cutting Immigration Myths Down to Size, cato.org, April 22,1997) A strong bipartisan
support for getting tough on illegal immigration by strengthening border enforcement, proposed changes to our legal immigration system are far more controversial. Supporters of further restrictions on legal immigration fail to make a convincing case for why they are necessary. They typically rely
on conventional myths that are easy to debunk. The most common myth: America has "uncontrolled" and "unprecedented" immigration. In fact, the U.S. immigration system is both limited and highly regulated. A U.S. citizen
can sponsor a spouse, parent, sibling, or minor or adult child. A lawful permanent resident can sponsor only a spouse or a child. Essentially the only other way to immigrate to America is as a refugee or through the strict employment-based system. All of the family and employment categories are numerically capped, with the exception of the spouses, children and parents of U.S. citizens. Immigration actually declined
naturally in both 1994 and 1995. Today 9 percent of the American population is foreign born. We are less of a nation of immigrants in 1996 than we were at anytime between 1850 and 1940 -- when the foreign-born population was at times almost twice as high as it is today.The second immigration myth: Current immigration law permits massive "chain migration." This term is used to describe what happens when one immigrant arrives and sponsors relatives, causing one after another to come to the United States over a short period of time. Nothing in current immigration law allows a person to sponsor an aunt, uncle,
cousin or other "extended" family member. Myth number three: Our legal immigration system leads to illegal immigration because "many illegal aliens first came in legally." Yes, they come legally -- but primarily as students or tourists who overstay their visas, not under any family category. It is therefore fatuous to argue that cutting family-based immigration will somehow reduce illegal immigration. Targeted measures, such as Senator Abraham's amendment to the Senate's illegal immigration bill, would address
that problem by preventing tho
26 Visas Aff/Neg
Types of Family Visas are Unlimited/Limited

Types of Family Visas are unlimited U.S. Department of State 10
(U.S. Department of State, Family Based Visas, The U.S. Department of State, 2010)
Immediate Relative Immigrant Visas (Unlimited): These visa types are based on a close family relationship with a United States (U.S.) citizen described as an Immediate Relative (IR). The number of immigrants in these categories is not limited each fiscal year. Immediate relative visa types include; IR-1: Spouse of a U.S. Citizen, IR-2: Unmarried Child Under 21 Years of Age of a U.S. Citizen, IR-3: Orphan adopted abroad by a U.S. Citizen, IR-4: Orphan to be adopted in the U.S. by a U.S. citizen, IR-5: Parent of a U.S. Citizen who is at least 21 years old.
Types of Family Visas are limited U.S. Department of State 10

(U.S. Department of State, Family Based Visas, The U.S. Department of State, 2010)
Family Preference Immigrant Visas (Limited): These visa types are for specific, more distant, family relationships with a U.S. citizen and some specified relationships with a Lawful Permanent Resident (LPR). There are fiscal year numerical limitations on family preference immigrants, shown at the end of each category. The family preference categories are; Family First Preference (F1): Unmarried sons and daughters of U.S. citizens, and their minor children, if any. (23,400) Family Second Preference (F2): Spouses, minor children, and unmarried sons and daughters (age 21 and over) of LPRs. At least seventy-seven percent of all visas available for this category will go to the spouses and children; the remainder is allocated to unmarried sons and daughters. (114,200) Family Third Preference (F3): Married sons and daughters of U.S. citizens, and their spouses and children. (23,400) Family Fourth Preference (F4): Brothers and sisters of U.S. citizens, and their spouses and minor children, provided the U.S. citizens are at least 21 years of age. (65,000) Note: Grandparents, aunts, uncles, in-laws and cousins cannot sponsor a relative for immigration.
27 Visas Aff/Neg
Remittance Hurts US Econ

US impacted negatively by separation of families.
United Families 2010
(United Families, movement to unite families of Lawful permanent residents How Families Are Affected Accessed July 30, 2010 < http://www.unitefamilies.org/eng/learn/families.html>) KC There are significant adverse economic impacts to the U.S. when Lawful Permanent Residents are separated from their families.
Immigrants with immediate families abroad often remit part of their earnings to them. Every year, an estimated 4.2 billion U.S. dollars is sent out of the country by LPRs who are supporting their spouses and families. Family unification would result in this money remaining in the U.S., as families of LPRs that come to the country add to the consumer base. Money that would be sent abroad to support them is now spent in the U.S. Though it can't be generalized, over time, entrepreneurial spirit in immigrants has resulted in a lot of success stories. Immigrants have a proven track record of creating jobs. An LPR forced to choose between country and family may choose to leave the U.S. When an LPR leaves the country, they take their jobs with them. Jobs
that may have been created in the U.S. as a result of the LPR's entrepreneurship would be moved elsewhere. This is demonstrated by a case study on the impact of reverse brain drain on the Taiwanese economy. In general, LPRs contribute significantly to the success of the
U.S. economy, as, on average, immigrants contribute $80K more in taxes over their lifetime than they receive in benefits. Taking aside moral aspects of this issue, the U.S. has still much to gain by uniting families of LPRs.
28 Visas Aff/Neg
**Family Visas Neg**
29 Visas Aff/Neg
K-3 Visas Fail

K-3 Visas is a confusing process to navigate.
Cruz 2010
(Reva Cruz, Immigration lawyer K-3 Visa Spouse Visa Processing 2010 http://www.streetdirectory.com/travel_guide/164003/travel_tips/k_3_visa___spouse_visa_processing.html) KC
K-3 Visa - Spouse visa processing is a rather lengthy and complicated process that involves several steps. It should be ideally made through an authorized immigration law firm that has extensive experience with US immigration laws, policies, regulations and procedures. Normally, K-3 Visas are issued to those people whose spouses are US citizens. The time duration of K-3 Visa - Spouse visa processing varies greatly on the basis of the applicants circumstances, nationality and the concerned embassy. The whole process will take around 5 to 7 months. Incorrectly filled out forms and varying degrees of inefficiency of visa granting governmental agencies can lag the processing of the K-3 Visa - Spouse visa application. If your part of filing and submission of visa application is done in the correct way and through proper channel, you can reduce the spouse visa processing time to a great extent. K-3 Visa processing is generally performed at the concerned USCIS (US Citizenship and Immigration Services) office and at the Consulate.
Before applying for the K3 Visa, an applicant must fulfill certain qualification requirements. They include: Must be married to a U.S. citizen who has filed a pending Petition for Alien Relative, Form I-130. Must be shown as the beneficiary on an approved I-129F form Must seek admission to the U.S. to wait for the completion of the immigration process. If the applicant satisfies the above conditions, he or she can go forward with the visa application procedures. The supporting documents to be produced at the time of submission of application form are: Legal certificates supporting birth, marriage, divorce and death. Valid passport Medical exam report from an approved physician or hospital Police certificate Though the whole immigration process involves a number of tedious steps, you can bring your alien spouse to stay together in the US in the shortest possible time if you seek expert consultation from an approved immigration attorney. Based on your unique circumstances , he will definitely find the best strategy to facilitate your K-3 Visa - Spouse visa processing.
30 Visas Aff/Neg
K-3 Visas Trade-Off

Changes in law of K-3 visas affect other K visas.
Hart 2010
(Ben Hart, Managing Director of Integrity Legal K-3 Visa Spouse Visa Processing March 4, 2010 http://www.articlesbase.com/law-articles/will-recent-nvc-processing-changes-impact-the-k1-visa-process-1940079.html) KC The United States National Visa Center (NVC) recently stated that as of 02/01/2010 they will no longer process I-129f petitions for K3 marriage visa benefits if the I-130 petition arrives before, or with, the supplemental I-129f petition. There may be those readers who are probably wondering what impact this will have upon visa seekers. For those seeking a K-3 visa, the possible consequence of this recent announcement is very important since the NVC, in certain situations, is now compelling couples to seek immigrant spouse visa benefits in the form of the IR-1 visa and the CR-1 visa rather than the non-immigrant K-3 visa. Although, the K3 visa petitioner submits an I-129f petition form in order to apply for K3 visa benefits this petition is also utilized when applying for fiance visa benefits as well. What effect will the recently announced rule change have upon the K1 visa obtainment process? In order to obtain an American fianc visa, the American Citizen must submit an I129f petition for K-1 visa benefits. If the petition is approved, then it will be sent to the National Visa Center (NVC) for processing. After the NVC processes the application, it will be forwarded to the US Embassy or Consulate-General with proper jurisdiction. Confusion may arise as there are those who may be placed under the mistaken impression that the I-129f petition will be administratively closed by NVC in a K-1 visa case. This is not likely to be the case, as so-called "administrative closures" of I-129f petitions are only supposed to occur in the context of applications for K-3 visa benefits and not in the context of K-1 visa benefits. This recent change in the rules will likely have no impact upon the K-1 visa process as the rule is designed to only impact the K-3 visa process.
31 Visas Aff/Neg
Family Visas Fail Wait Time

Family Visas have a long wait time causing problems.
Estrella 2005
(Cicero Estrella, Chronicle Staff Writer, Reporter, Laws Could Help Unite Immigrant Families December 12, 2005 < http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/12/12/BAG9CG6DON1.DTL>) KC
The spouses of legal permanent residents, or green card holders, such as Balas cannot enter the United States, even for a brief visit, during the five years permanent residents must wait before they are eligible for U.S. citizenship. But Unite Families, a support group with 600 members nationwide, including Balas and 25 others in the Bay Area, is appealing to Congress to change the law. "I never thought it would be this difficult," Balas said. Each fiscal year, the U.S. Department of State provides 480,000 family visas, which an immigrant's spouse and nonmarried children under 21 use to stay in the country while awaiting immigrant status. Immediate family members of citizens get priority, and the remainder are available to other groups, including the immediate family of legal permanent residents. Demand for visas exceeds the supply, and applications take four to five years to process because of the backlog, according to the State Department's visa bulletin. Visitor visas, which allow a temporary stay, are not usually an option for people like Renuka Balas, because they must prove they do not intend to immigrate. In a second paradox, Bay Area high-tech workers from Asia who enter the country on student or worker visas, which afford temporary residence, have an easier time obtaining visitor visas for family members before they apply for a green card. "I really don't see a reason why things are the way they are," said Alex Maslov, 31, who hopes to marry a woman from his country, Russia. "If I had a wife and children now, I wouldn't have a problem bringing them here with my H-1B (worker visa). Once I get a green card, there's no way. That's unfair treatment of (legal) residents."
Because of the 5 year wait period, parents lose out on childrens lives, fiancs separated and single LPRs affected.
(United Families, movement to unite families of Lawful permanent residents How Families Are Affected Accessed July 30, 2010 < http://www.unitefamilies.org/eng/learn/families.html>) KC
Family separation is a serious issue. It causes significant emotional turmoil and can have longlasting and devastating effects. Lawful Permanent Residents are denied playing an active role in raising their own children. For no fault of their own, children and parents miss priceless moments that are witnessed in normal family environments every day. Even worse, for those families who cannot afford frequent travel, a child grows up not knowing one of his/her parents. Five years is an incredibly long time during childhood. LPRs must live separated from their husband or wife, being forced into a predicament that is widely recognized as unpleasant and challenging a long-distance relationship. This can cause breakups of what would otherwise be normal happy families. Single LPRs are also affected. Those who are ready to marry and start a family often have difficulty in finding an acceptable life partner. Their immigrant status, in essence, prevents them from marrying a loved one from their own country and living in the U.S. The senseless part is that if they had married
prior to becoming a Lawful Permanent Resident, they would have avoided family separation altogether.
32 Visas Aff/Neg
Visas Fail Unfair Laws

Family members separated because of unfair laws.
(United Families, movement to unite families of Lawful permanent residents How Families Are Affected Accessed July 30, 2010 < http://www.unitefamilies.org/eng/learn/families.html>) KC An LPR that marries a foreign born person after becoming a permanent resident has to remain separated from his/her spouse and children until immigrant visas are granted for the family members. There is an annual numerical limit on this category of visas, and demand exceeds supply. Family members cannot visit the U.S. or study here because those visa categories require proof of non-immigrant intent. That is, they must prove that they have no intention to stay in the U.S. to be allowed to enter the U.S. on a student or vistor visa. Since the spouse and children of a permanent resident are applying for premanent residency, they cannot demonstrate non-immigrant intent.
Family Visas cause a back log and cause false expectations FAIR 02
(Federation for American Immigration Reform, The Nuclear Family: A Matter of Fairness, http://www.fairus.org/site/News2? page=NewsArticle&id=16473, July 2002)
The United States cannot absorb everyone who wants to come to this country. Therefore, limits and
preferences must be established to decide who comes, and how many. Omnibus immigration reform efforts by former House Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-TX), and Senate Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Alan Simpson (RWY), were key to restoring public support for our legal immigration system. Unfortunately, those efforts, which paralleled the recommendations of the blue ribbon Commission on Immigration Reform, headed by the late Barbara Jordan, have been amended to eliminate a new system of priorities. The current system allows petitions for not only nuclear family
members--spouses and minor children--but also parents, adult children, married children, brothers and sisters, and grandchildren. These extended family categories cause an unending, expanding chain of migration and unprecedented levels of annual immigration. The consequence has been a huge backlog, with waiting lists extending 10 to 20 years. The backlog and the hope to immigrate on the basis of the broad admission standard in turn encourages illegal immigration, as people decide to await their hoped for green cards illegally in the U.S. Our immigration system is unfair to aspiring immigrants and to the American people and is at odds with our national interests. We must follow the Jordan Commission's recommendation to eliminate unwieldy categories and the false expectations they foster in order to restore credibility to the system.
33 Visas Aff/Neg
Visas Impede on Traditions

The visa process impedes on marriage traditions of other countries.
Estrella 2005
(Cicero Estrella, Chronicle Staff Writer, Reporter, Laws Could Help Unite Immigrant Families December 12, 2005 < http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/12/12/BAG9CG6DON1.DTL>) KC
Natarajan, 32, of Campbell, said the problem is well known in his native India, where many marriages are arranged by parents. He said his status as legal permanent resident has impeded his mother's matchmaking attempts in his hometown of Chennai. Natarajan said his mother has approached five or six families since he
received his green card in October 2004 but has been dismissed quickly after potential brides' parents learn his immigration status. "She continues to look," Natarajan said. "Any time she talks to a family, the first question is, does your son have a green
card? The discussion stops right there. They'll say, 'How can this (marriage) even happen? There'll be a five-year separation. We'll talk to you later. Bye-bye.' " Natarajan came to the United States on a student visa in 1994. Two years later, he
graduated from the University of Wisconsin in Madison and went to work for a computer company after receiving a worker's visa. His company sponsored him for his green card. Gaurav Negi plans to return to Delhi in December to marry, even though he knows his bride won't be able to return to Sunnyvale with him. The 29-year-old software engineer was introduced to his fiancee, Rohina Rawat, by his parents during a visit to India in October 2004, four months after he was granted permanent residency. "I wanted to be secure so I got my green card,"
he said. "Now I've lost a basic privilege of life."
34 Visas Aff/Neg
Family Visas Cause Illegal Immigration

Family Visas cause illegal immigration FAIR 02
(Federation for American Immigration Reform, The Nuclear Family: A Matter of Fairness, http://www.fairus.org/site/News2? page=NewsArticle&id=16473, July 2002)
Current immigration reform efforts have recognized the importance of the nuclear family and have provided for admission of the spouse and unmarried children of U.S. citizens. An individual
granted permission to enter as a Lawful Permanent Resident may continue to bring his/her spouse and minor children immediately into the United States. In addition, provision has been made for citizens to petition for parents under certain restrictions. However,
the efforts to cut off automatic immigration privileges for extended family members, thereby ending the chain migration effect, have proven unsuccessful. While, it is fair to immigrants and U.S. citizens to keep nuclear families together, in FAIR's view, it is not the responsibility of the American people or government to reunite an immigrant's extended family after that individual has made a personal choice to immigrate here. Furthermore, by eliminating the extended relative categories, the waiting list of spouses and minor children of citizens and immigrants could be shortened. Under the porposed reforms, extended family members would have to apply for immigration to the U.S. based on their own merit, not because they are related to someone. Emphasis on the nuclear family would repair our immigration system in important ways: Backlogs of spouses and children would be reduced or eliminated. No false expectations would be perpetuated. An incentive for illegal immigration would be removed. The system would become more responsive to changing national needs. True
reform of our immigration system will require tough choices and determination. We must implement the principles and actions recommended by the Jordan Commission, which are supported by the overwhelming majority of the American people.
35 Visas Aff/Neg
**T-Visas Aff/Neg**
36 Visas Aff/Neg
Uncapping T-Visas Solves

T-Visa cap reached, unlimited cap solves Dibranco 7/10 (http://immigration.change.org/blog/view/all_10000_visas_for_crime_victims_used_up Immigrants
Rights) Unfortunately,
all 10,000 T visas for this year have been used up, and the next round won't be available until October (the beginning of the next fiscal year). And while victims who are currently cooperating with authorities can be given temporary status until the visas become available again, every year the backlog will increase. Instead of putting an arbitrary cap on visas that should automatically be issued to anybody who qualifies, the federal government should make T visas unlimited and focus on making a concerted effort to get the word about their existence.
37 Visas Aff/Neg
T-Visas Fail Paranoia

T-Visas Fail
Tancinco 07/25/2010 (http://globalnation.inquirer.net/viewpoints/viewpoints/view/20100725-283036/Visa-protection-forvictims-of-crimes-and-trafficking) Most victims
of crimes are afraid of retaliation by the perpetrators. One of the requirements for an immigrant victim to obtain the U visa is to show evidence of cooperation with a federal, state, or local law enforcement office in the prosecution of the criminal activity.For many victims of crime, taking the initiative to contact law enforcement officers is a very risky step. There are those who feel that their safety is not guaranteed if they continue to reside in the US. Just like in the case of Julieta, many victims may feel that evading the perpetrator of the crime in order to avoid getting hurt is an easier route to take than to assist in the perpetrators prosecution.Several outreach efforts are being undertaken by non-profit organizations and
government agencies to disseminate information about the existence of protection programs for victims of crimes.Unfortunately, not all government officials are aware of the protocol in the implementation of this U visa program. Thus, continuing training and information dissemination are needed.
38 Visas Aff/Neg
**Work Immigrant Visas Good**
39 Visas Aff/Neg
Solves Wages
Immigration leads to net increase in wages
Dustmann 08
( [Department of Economics, University College London (UCL). The Effect of Immigration along the Distribution of Wages, (Centre for Research and Analysis of Migration), http://eprints.ucl.ac.uk/14249/]) JR
On average over the distribution of natives, we find that immigration, over the period considered, leads to a slight increase in average wages. We then investigate possible reasons for the positive average wage effects we obtain. We note that even in a
simple one industry model, where the only adjustment mechanism to changes in skill mix are wages, average wages need not to decrease if capital supply is sufficiently elastic. Moreover, with elastic capital supply and finite immigration, the immigration surplus will be distributed among native workers, so that the average wage effect may well be positive. Simulating the magnitude of the surplus reveals however that the wage effects we obtain are too large to be explained by this surplus. We suggest two other reasons
for a migration surplus. First, in the presence of wage stickiness, changes in demand conditions may create a situation where the wage received differs from the marginal product of labour within particular skill groups. If immigrants tend to allocate to labour markets where this difference is large, then this may lead to a surplus which may partly go to native labour. Secondly, if immigrants downgrade (as we demonstrate in our data), and work for wages which are below their marginal productivity, then this may again lead to a surplus, where native workers are the beneficiaries. Our simulations suggest that both explanations may contribute to the overall positive wage effect we observe.
Positive impact on long-term wages

Ottaviano & Peri 08
[Gianmarco I.P. Ottaviano; Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM); Centre for Economic Policy Research (CEPR); Bocconi University Department of Economics (DEP) and KITeS, Giovanni Peri; University of California, Davis - Department of Economics. Immigration and National Wages: Clarifying the Theory and the Empirics http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1165516] JR First, a structural model of production that combines workers of different skills as well as capital, and furthermore estimates their elasticities of substitution, is necessary to assess the effect of immigration on the wages of native workers of different skills. Estimating a reduced form or a partial elasticity cannot possibly be informative of the total effect of immigration as this derives not only from the direct competition but also from the indirect complementarities of immigrants. Second a crucial parameter in determining the effect of immigrants is
the elasticity of substitution between workers with no degree and workers with a high school degree. This
paper demonstrates that the long-established tradition in labor economics (but overlooked by Borjas, 2003, Borjas and Katz, 2007 and Ottaviano and Peri, 2006a) of assuming that this elasticity is infinite is strongly supported by the data. While the elasticity between
workers with some college education or more and those with high school education or less is much smaller (equal to 2), the balanced inflow of immigrants belonging to these two groups implies very small relative wage effects of immigration, and a very small negative impact on wages of less educated immigrants. Third, there seems to be a small but significant degree of imperfect substitution between natives and immigrants within education-experience groups. An elasticity of 20 is strongly supported by our estimates. This cannot be ruled out even by the extremely conservative method of Borjas, Grogger and Hanson (2008). For immigration to the US between 1990 and 2006, it implies an average positive long-run effect on native wages equal to +0.6% and an average negative effect on the wages of previous immigrants of about -6%. Fourth, accounting for capital adjustment, the negative effect of immigration on wages is modest even in the short run: 0.7% for workers with no high school degree as of 2007. This represents a substantial revision of the previous short-run effects calculated using the
Borjas and Katz (2007) method that would be for the 1990-2006 period equal to around 7.8% or workers with no high school degree. Such a large discrepancy is mainly due to their unwarranted assumptions of a fixed capital stock and a small elasticity of substitution between workers with no degree and those with a high school degree (around 2.4). In sum, this paper reconciles the estimates and the findings of the national approach to the effects of immigration on wages with most of the estimates of the substitutability across workers of different skills produced by the labor literature in the last fifteen years. It also reconciles the aggregate evidence on the wage effects of immigrants with the evidence from the area approach which has always found small effects across US cities. In this respect, we hope that our modeling strategy as well as our estimates and simulations can provide a unified reference point for the current and future debate on the wage-effects of immigration in the US.
40 Visas Aff/Neg
Solves Wages Extension

Immigrants increase incomes of U.S. residents Hanson 07
[Gordon, the director of the Center on Pacific Economies and professor of economics at University of California, San Diego, April,The Economic Logic of Illegal Immigration, CSR NO. 26, APRIL 2007 COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONSwww.cfr.org/content/publications/.../ImmigrationCSR26.pdf]
Overall, immigration
increases the incomes of U.S. residents by allowing the economy to utilize domestic resources more efficiently. But because immigrants of different types illegal, legal temporary, and legal permanenthave varying skill levels, income-earning ability, family size, and rights to use public services, changes in their respective inflows have different economic impacts. Immigration also affects U.S. incomes through its impact on tax revenue and
public expenditure. Immigrants with lower incomes and larger families tend to be a bigger drain on public spending.
Immigrants pay income, payroll, sales, property, and other taxes, with lower-skilled immigrants making smaller contributions. Immigrants use public services by sending their kids to public schools, demanding fire and police protection, driving on roads and highways, and receiving public assistance, with families that have larger numbers of children absorbing more expenditure. Adding the pretax income gains from immigration to immigrants net
tax contributionstheir tax payments less the value of government services they useallows for a rough estimate of the net impact of immigration on the U.S. economy.
Immigration increases productivity and U.S. income Hanson 07

[Gordon, the director of the Center on Pacific Economies and professor of economics at University of California, San Diego, April,The Economic Logic of Illegal Immigration, CSR NO. 26, APRIL 2007 COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONSwww.cfr.org/content/publications/.../ImmigrationCSR26.pdf] Immigration generates extra income for the U.S. economy, even as it pushes down wages for some workers. By
increasing the supply of labor, immigration raises the productivity of resources that are complementary to labor. More workers allow U.S. capital, land, and natural resources to be exploited more efficiently. Increasing the supply of labor to perishable fruits and vegetables, for instance, means that each acre of land under cultivation generates more output. Similarly, an expansion in the number of manufacturing workers allows the existing industrial base to produce more goods. The gain in productivity yields extra income for U.S. businesses, which is termed the immigration surplus. The annual immigration
surplus in the United States appears to be small, equal to about 0.2 percent of GDP in 2004.33
41 Visas Aff/Neg
Solves Innovation
Immigrants increase Innovation
Hunt 09
[Hunt, Jennifer; McGill University, NBER and IZA, Gauthier-Loiselle, Marjolaine,; Princeton University. How Much Does Immigration Boost Innovation?, American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, Volume 2, Number 2, April 2010 , pp. 31-56(26)]JR
We find that a college graduate immigrant contributes at least twice as much to patenting as his or her native counterpart. The difference is fully explained by the greater share of immigrants with science and engineering education, implying
immigrants are not innately more able than natives. Indeed, immigrants are less likely to have patented recently than observably similar native scientists and engineers. Despite this, the fact that immigrants increase patenting per capita shows that their
presence in the United States provides a previously uncharacterized benefit to natives, assuming the immigrants
would have been less innovative or less able to commercialize their innovation elsewhere or that U.S. natives benefit more from innovation and commercialization in the United States than abroad. We can make a crude calculation of the benefit using the results of Furman, Porter and Stern (2002), who find that the elasticity of a countrys GDP with respect to its patent stock is 0.113, controlling for capital and labor. This elasticity implies that the influx of immigrant college graduates in the 1990s increased U.S. GDP per capita by 1.4
2.4%. One should be cautious in drawing the conclusion that innovation could be sustained by simultaneously subsidizing natives to study science and engineering and cutting immigration of scientists and engineers. The additional natives drawn into science and engineering might have lower inventive ability than the excluded immigrants, and such natives might have contributed more to the U.S. economy outside science and engineering. Employment Visas account for a huge chunk of American Innovation Demetrios 09
[G. Papademetriou, Doris Meissner, Marc R. Rosenblum, and Madeleine Sumption, Harnessing the Advantages of Immigration for a 21st-Century Economy: A Standing Commission on Labor Markets, Economic Competitiveness, and Immigration, http://www.migrationpolicy.org/pubs/StandingCommission_May09.pdf] These economic effects are complex. On the one hand, labor market immigration makes an immediate contribution to the US economy by allowing US firms to hire immigrant workers across the skills continuum. At the high-skilled end,
foreign-born students, researchers, workers across many disciplines (but primarily in the sciences, technology, and the professions), and entrepreneurs have been at the heart of American innovation and productivity for decades. About a third of Americas 20thcentury Nobel Prize winners, for example, were immigrants.8 Immigrants also founded or cofounded a quarter of all new engineering and technology companies formed in the United States between 1995 and 2005, were responsible for a quarter of Americas patents in 2006 (up from 7 percent in 1998)9 and made up seven out of 16 inductees into the National Inventors Hall of Fame in 2009.10 What is significant about the latter set of numbers is that they can be attributed to change to US immigration law in 1990 that substantially expanded the number of visas available to better-skilled and educated immigrants. This lesson animates the proposal being made here.
42 Visas Aff/Neg
Solves Economy
Employment based immigrant visa holders have a net positive affect on economy Hanson 07
[Gordon, the director of the Center on Pacific Economies and professor of economics at University of California, San Diego, April,The Economic Logic of Illegal Immigration, CSR NO. 26, APRIL 2007 COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONSwww.cfr.org/content/publications/.../ImmigrationCSR26.pdf] Immigration, by admitting large numbers of low-skilled individuals, may exacerbate inefficiencies associated with the countrys system of public finance.37 If immigrants pay more in taxes than they receive in
government benefits, then immigration generates a net fiscal transfer to native taxpayers. The total impact of immigration on U.S. residentsthe sum of the immigration surplus (the pretax income gain) and the net fiscal transfer from immigrantswould be unambiguously positive. This appears to be the case for immigrants with high skill levels, suggesting that employment-based permanent immigrants and highly skilled temporary immigrants have a positive net impact on the U.S. economy.38 They generate a positive immigration surplus (by raising U.S. productivity) and make a positive net tax contribution (by adding to U.S. government coffers).39
43 Visas Aff/Neg
**Work Immigrant Visas Bad**
44 Visas Aff/Neg
Backlog kills solvency

Economic production of immigrant workers is hindered by visa backlog Hanson 07
[Gordon, the director of the Center on Pacific Economies and professor of economics at University of California, San Diego, April,The Economic Logic of Illegal Immigration, CSR NO. 26, APRIL 2007 COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONSwww.cfr.org/content/publications/.../ImmigrationCSR26.pdf] Illegal immigration, employment-based
permanent immigration, and temporary immigration each tend to provide the U.S. economy with workers who are in scarce supply. Family-based immigration, which is the largest component of permanent admissions, is set without regard to U.S. labor market conditions. Legal immigration of skilled workers is hindered by queues for visas and lags in adjusting visa levels, which reduce the economic value of such immigration. Flows of illegal immigrants, in contrast, are closely tied to U.S. and Mexican business cycles.
45 Visas Aff/Neg
No Economic Solvency
Plan would not affect economy because recipients are already contributing to economy Martin 06
[Susan, January, U.S. Employment-Based Admissions: Permanent and Temporary. Migration Policy Institute Policy Brief No. 15, www.migrationpolicy.org/ITFIAF/PB_15_1.06.pdf] Because the US system is employer/employee-driven and a job offer is essential, most
of those admitted to permanent residence in the employment-based categories are already in the United States. Due to delays in labor certification, employers tend to use temporary visa categories to bridge the gap between the decision to hire the worker and the governments grant of permanent resident status. As a result, the recruitment process required by labor certification rules is often a farce, the employer having already hired the foreign worker.
46 Visas Aff/Neg
Decreases Wages
An increase in employment visas causes a decrease in wages Demetrios 09
[G. Papademetriou, Doris Meissner, Marc R. Rosenblum, and Madeleine Sumption, Harnessing the Advantages of Immigration for a 21st-Century Economy: A Standing Commission on Labor Markets, Economic Competitiveness, and Immigration, http://www.migrationpolicy.org/pubs/StandingCommission_May09.pdf] Yet immigration is neither uniformly nor unambiguously beneficial. At a minimum, worker inflows have uneven distributional consequences. While economists remain divided about many of the details, most agree that for at least some US residents, relative wages fall as a result of immigration. In particular, low-skilled
native-born workers (those without a high school degree), recent immigrants, and workers with poor language skills are most likely to suffer wage losses from immigration.14 Current US
labor market immigration policies and implementation are poorly designed to address these tensions and simply basing policy on labor market shortages determined from survey data is too blunt an instrument to accomplish the more refined policy objectives that are increasingly needed. With a few exceptions,15 the current system is based on employer recruitment. This approach has the strong benefits of efficiently screening potential labor market immigrants for their fit with US employers needs and properly rewarding human capital endowments (skills and education) at the higher end of the labor market.16
47 Visas Aff/Neg
**Misc**
48 Visas Aff/Neg
Health Care Solves Econ

Healthcare saves US economy. Increases wages, saves US companies and jobs. Locke, 9 (Gary, U.S. secretary of Commerce, WSJ,
http://online.wsj.com/article/NA_WSJ_PUB:SB10001424052970203706604574376450845822712.html) JS
You have probably heard the horror stories about President Barack Obama's health-care proposals leading to rationed care and bankrupt businesses and governments. Those claims are flat wrong. The real horror story is not what health-care reform
will bring. It's what's already happening. There has been a lot of talk about the 47 million Americans who do not have health insurance. But health-care reform is just as important to the majority of Americans who have health insurance now.
Absent reform, the price of an average family's insurance will nearly double over the next decadeto $25,000 from $13,000. No less troubling are the stories I hear from CEOs, entrepreneurs and workers. Rising health-care costs are crushing American companiesparticularly small businesses that are the source of much of our economic vitality. In 1960, U.S. firms spent 1.2% of their payroll on health insurance. In 2006, they spent 9.9%. Costs rising at this rate are unsustainable and put U.S. firms at a competitive disadvantage to foreign companies that almost universally have lighter health-care burdens. It also destroys U.S. jobs. Last month, the nonpartisan Rand Corporation released a study that looked at 37 industries from 1987 to 2005 and concluded that excess health-care costs were causing significant job losses as well as revenue and output losses for many American industries. After controlling for other factors, sectors with the highest percentage of employer-
sponsored health care (such as the automotive industry) had worse performances than industries in which employer health coverage is uncommon. These escalating costs have been passed on to the middle class
in the form of higher prices and flat wages. Money that would have gone to raises has instead been
spent on health-care premiums that have doubled over the past nine years.
49 Visas Aff/Neg
Health Care Solves Econ Ext

Health Care saves the economy by increasing consumer spending, lowering medical costs, and increasing jobs.
Gruber 8 (Jonathan, MIT Professor of Economics, http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/04/opinion/04gruber.html?_r=1) JS
Given the present need to address the economic crisis, many people say the government cannot afford a big investment in health care, that these plans are going nowhere fast. But this represents a false choice, because health care reform is good
for our economy. As the country slips into what is possibly the worst downturn since the Depression, nearly all experts agree that Washington should stimulate demand with new spending. And one of the most effective ways to spend would be to give states money to enroll more people in Medicaid and the State Childrens Health Insurance Plan. This would free up state money for rebuilding roads and bridges and other public works projects spending that could create jobs. Health care reform can be an engine of job growth
in other ways, too. Most proposals call for investments in health information technology, including the computerization of patient medical records. During the campaign, for example, Mr. Obama proposed spending $50 billion on such technology. The hope is that computerized recordkeeping, and the improved sharing of information among doctors that it would enable,
would improve the quality of patient care and perhaps also lower medical costs. More immediately, it would create jobs in the technology sector. After all, somebody would need to develop the computer systems and operate them for thousands of American health care providers. Expanded insurance coverage would also drive demand for high-paying, rewarding jobs in health services. Most reform proposals emphasize reform would also stimulate more consumer spending, as previously uninsured families would no longer need to save every extra penny to cover a medical emergency. When the federal government expanded Medicaid in the 1990s, my own research has shown, the newly insured
primary care, much of which can be provided by nurse practitioners, registered nurses and physicians assistants. These jobs could provide a landing spot for workers who have lost jobs in other sectors of the economy. Fundamental health care
significantly increased their spending on consumer goods. Universal health insurance coverage would also address economic problems that existed before this downturn began and that are likely to linger after growth resumes. In our current system, people who leave or lose their jobs often must go without insurance for months or years, and this discourages people from moving to positions where they could be more productive. Most reform proposals call for the creation of pools of insurance coverage that would guarantee access to high-quality, affordable care for people who are self-employed or out of work, increasing their mobility. If this coverage focuses on disease prevention and wellness, it could also improve the health, and thereby the productivity, of the workforce. In the long term, the greatest fiscal threat facing this nation is the growth
in the costs of health care. These costs have more than tripled as a share of our economy since 1950, and show no signs of abating. The Congressional Budget Office recently
projected that the share
50 Visas Aff/Neg
Backlog Causes Illegal Immigration

Backlogging causes illegal immigration McKay 03 (Ramah McKay, US in Focus, Migration Policy Institute, May 2003) By 2001, the former INS faced an application backlog of 3.9 million for all benefits, including naturalization and immigrant and non-immigrant visas, four times the number of backlogged applications in 1994. In
2002 the backlog for adjustment of status applications, one of the primary means by which family members of legal permanent residents and US citizens apply for lawful permanent residency, was 966,341. This backlog represented 57 percent of the total caseload. In addition, by the end of 2002, there were more than one million backlogged applications
for numerically limited slots in preference category 2 (spouses and children of legal permanent residents). The backlog results in long waiting periods between the time that a petition is approved and the time that a visa may be issued. For some categories of applicants, that wait may be decades long. Many analysts believe that alleviating the backlog by processing increased numbers of applicants each year and raising the cap on the first and second preference categories would reduce significantly the number of illegal aliens in the United States.

Visas Good Bad

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Visas Good Bad

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

ADI 2010 Peterson/Perry

ADI 2010 Peterson/Perry

ADI 2010 Peterson/Perry

ADI 2010 Peterson/Perry

Protectionism Tanks Economy

ADI 2010 Peterson/Perry

Illegal Employment Results in Atrocities

ADI 2010 Peterson/Perry

Hard Power Bad

ADI 2010 Peterson/Perry

Families Have Right to Unite

Interest of dependents should be strongest reason families stay together.

US is founded on immigrant families and their unity.

ADI 2010 Peterson/Perry

**Temp Workers Aff Ev**

ADI 2010 Peterson/Perry

H-2A Solve Displacement

ADI 2010 Peterson/Perry

H-1Bs Attracts Intelligence

ADI 2010 Peterson/Perry

High Skilled Visas Solve Technology/Jobs

ADI 2010 Peterson/Perry

A2: H-1B Job Displacement

ADI 2010 Peterson/Perry

Temp Visas Solve

ADI 2010 Peterson/Perry

Temp Visas Solve

ADI 2010 Peterson/Perry

Temp Visas Solve

ADI 2010 Peterson/Perry

***Temp Workers Neg***

ADI 2010 Peterson/Perry

Temp Visas Cause Abuse

ADI 2010 Peterson/Perry

Temp Visas Fail - Athletes

ADI 2010 Peterson/Perry

Temp Visas Cause Unemployment

ADI 2010 Peterson/Perry

**Family Visas Aff**

ADI 2010 Peterson/Perry

Immigration Reform Benefits GL Communities

ADI 2010 Peterson/Perry

A2: K-1 Visa Waiting Times

ADI 2010 Peterson/Perry

A2: V-Visa Wait Times

ADI 2010 Peterson/Perry

CSPA Protects Children

ADI 2010 Peterson/Perry

A2: Immigration Flood

ADI 2010 Peterson/Perry

Types of Family Visas are Unlimited/Limited

Types of Family Visas are limited U.S. Department of State 10

ADI 2010 Peterson/Perry

Remittance Hurts US Econ

ADI 2010 Peterson/Perry

**Family Visas Neg**

ADI 2010 Peterson/Perry

K-3 Visas Fail

ADI 2010 Peterson/Perry

K-3 Visas Trade-Off

ADI 2010 Peterson/Perry

Family Visas Fail Wait Time

ADI 2010 Peterson/Perry

Temp Workers Aff Ev

Temp Workers Neg

Family Visas Aff

Family Visas Neg

Work Immigrant Visas Good

Work Immigrant Visas Bad