Bill Overview
Title: Honor Our Commitment Act of 2022
Description: This bill limits the detention or removal of qualified Vietnamese nationals from the United States and contains other related provisions. A national of Vietnam may not be detained or removed if that individual (1) is subject to a final order of removal, and (2) has continuously resided in the United States since July 12, 1995, or an earlier date. An otherwise qualifying alien may not receive such protections if (1) the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) determines that the alien is directly responsible for harming U.S. national security, or (2) the alien is subject to extradition. A qualified Vietnamese national shall receive authorization to work in the United States. DHS must notify each qualified Vietnamese national about the provisions of this bill.
Sponsors: Rep. Lowenthal, Alan S. [D-CA-47]
Target Audience
Population: Vietnamese nationals with a final order of removal who have resided in the US since July 12, 1995 or earlier
Estimated Size: 22000
- The bill affects Vietnamese nationals in the US who have a final order of removal and have resided in the US since July 12, 1995, or earlier, offering them protection from removal and detention.
- The bill offers work authorization to these qualified individuals, impacting their economic wellbeing.
- The restrictions ensure that individuals who are directly responsible for harming US national security or subject to extradition may not benefit from the protection of this bill.
- The Vietnamese diaspora is significant globally but by targeting individuals in the US, the focus is quite specific.
Reasoning
- The target population for this policy is Vietnamese nationals with a final order of removal who have resided in the US since July 12, 1995, or earlier.
- This group is estimated to be around 22,000 individuals within the larger Vietnamese-American community, which numbers over 2.2 million.
- The policy would affect different individuals within this group depending on their current legal, economic, and social circumstances.
- Some individuals might experience significant improvements in their legal security and economic prospects, while for others the impact might be minimal if they are already well-integrated or if the policy does not change their risk status.
- Budget constraints will limit the extent and speed of implementation, potentially affecting the immediate impact on wellbeing.
Simulated Interviews
Plumber (Westminster, California)
Age: 57 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I am hopeful about this policy because it means I can work without fear of being deported.
- My family and I have lived here for so long; this gives us stability.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Home care worker (Houston, Texas)
Age: 63 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 18/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy feels like a new chance.
- I worry about being taken away from my grandchildren, so any protection is welcome.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 2 |
Software developer (Atlanta, Georgia)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Personally, the policy doesn't change much for me immediately as I have a work visa.
- It's reassuring to have additional legal protection and I know it benefits many in my community.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Restaurant owner (San Jose, California)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Finally, I can focus on growing my business without fear of deportation.
- This policy provides needed relief and improves my ability to plan long-term.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
Stay-at-home parent (Los Angeles, California)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is a relief as it allows me to support my kids' education and future.
- I am grateful for the opportunity to stay and contribute without the looming threat of deportation.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 3 |
Taxi driver (New York, New York)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 16/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I've lived in fear of unemployment and deportation, so this policy means everything to me.
- Legal work status removes a huge burden off my shoulders.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 2 |
Mechanic (Seattle, Washington)
Age: 47 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Having a stable status helps me plan better and relieves stress.
- It also provides security for my family.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 3 |
Retired (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania)
Age: 66 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I rely on my children already, but knowing I won't be deported is a relief.
- I'm able to focus more on my health and enjoying my retirement.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 2 |
Retired engineer (Chicago, Illinois)
Age: 72 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 3
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I've lived here most of my life, and I want to spend the rest of my days here without fear.
- The policy allows me to stay connected with my community and family here.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 2 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 2 |
Nurse (San Diego, California)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy provides a sense of stability that helps in focusing on my job of helping others.
- It lifts a huge weight from my shoulders, allowing me to look forward to the future with less anxiety.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 3 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $120000000 (Low: $80000000, High: $160000000)
Year 2: $30000000 (Low: $20000000, High: $50000000)
Year 3: $30000000 (Low: $20000000, High: $50000000)
Year 5: $30000000 (Low: $20000000, High: $50000000)
Year 10: $30000000 (Low: $20000000, High: $50000000)
Year 100: $18000000 (Low: $12000000, High: $25000000)
Key Considerations
- DHS administrative capacity to implement notification and work authorization tasks.
- Long-term integration and economic participation of the targeted population.
- National and local workforce and economic implications of granting work authorization to a discreet population segment.