Bill Overview
Title: Protecting Immigrant Gold Star and Military Families Act
Description: This bill limits the deportability of certain relatives of current and former members of the Armed Forces. Certain grounds of deportability shall not apply to a qualifying non-U.S. national ( alien under federal law) who is (1) the spouse, widow or widower, parent, child, or sibling of a member of the Armed Forces or a veteran; or (2) eligible for a Gold Star lapel button (for certain immediate relatives of a member of the Armed Forces who died while serving). A qualifying non-U.S. national is one who (1) has not have been convicted of a felony, significant misdemeanor, or three misdemeanors; and (2) is not a threat to national security or public safety.
Sponsors: Rep. Gallego, Ruben [D-AZ-7]
Target Audience
Population: Relatives of U.S. Armed Forces members or veterans who are non-U.S. nationals
Estimated Size: 50000
- The bill affects relatives of current and former members of the Armed Forces.
- It extends protection from deportation to spouses, widows, widowers, parents, children, and siblings of service members or veterans.
- It specifically applies to those non-U.S. nationals who qualify under the eligibility criteria outlined, such as not having convictions or posing threats.
- Gold Star lapel button eligibility indicates the family suffered a loss of a service member during duties.
Reasoning
- The policy targets non-U.S. national relatives of current and former Armed Forces members, including those eligible for the Gold Star lapel button, which implies a specific but significant subset of the population.
- It's critical to represent various demographics within this population, as well as those not directly impacted, to gauge a comprehensive view of the policy's effects.
- Considering the budget constraints, the estimated target population covered will be a fraction of the estimated 50,000 beneficiaries in the first year.
Simulated Interviews
Nurse (San Diego, CA)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy would bring a lot of peace of mind knowing I won't be forced to leave my husband and children.
- It's a necessary measure for families like mine who contribute to this country.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 10 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 5 |
Carpenter (El Paso, TX)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- My brother served this country; I support this policy because it supports families like mine that keep the community strong.
- Deportation fears have impacted our family life significantly.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 4 |
Software Engineer (Dallas, TX)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy would acknowledge my family’s sacrifices and help secure my future here.
- I'm hopeful this policy goes through and makes my situation more stable.
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 | 10 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 3 |
Retired (Baton Rouge, LA)
Age: 58 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Being allowed to stay close to my son during his deployment gives me peace of mind.
- This act is vital for military families who sacrifice a lot.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 3 |
Teacher (Chicago, IL)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I’m already a citizen, but I see the benefits this policy could provide to many others who deserve a break.
- My late husband's friends would benefit directly from this.
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 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Student (Miami, FL)
Age: 25 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While I’m not directly protected by this bill, it inspires hope within my family that policies can change for the better.
- Any policy that supports military families is good.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Entrepreneur (Seattle, WA)
Age: 48 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Knowing that my presence in this country is more secure after my son's sacrifice means the world to me.
- This policy would have given me more support during the hardest times.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Business Owner (New York, NY)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't need protections from this policy, but I fully support it as it strengthens the fabric of our community by keeping families together.
- A good initiative for military families.
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 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Retired Veteran (Tucson, AZ)
Age: 62 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's about time policies recognize the familial sacrifices made by our nation’s veterans.
- My daughter-in-law should have the peace of mind to stay without fear.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Veterinary Technician (Sacramento, CA)
Age: 31 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This bill would give us the security to ensure my husband can focus on his duties without worrying about my immigration status.
- Finally, a policy that reflects families' true needs.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 10 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 10 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 4 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)
Year 2: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)
Year 3: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)
Year 5: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)
Year 10: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)
Year 100: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)
Key Considerations
- The eligible population is relatively small, limiting the overall fiscal impact of the bill.
- Ensuring the policy efficiently addresses only eligible candidates without expanding to unintended populations could help control costs.
- Potential savings from reduced deportation proceedings and impacts on families' economic stability should be monitored.