Bill Overview
Title: Case Backlog and Transparency Act of 2022
Description: This bill addresses Department of Homeland Security (DHS) efforts to address the backlog in immigration applications. DHS must establish a process on its website for immigration benefit applicants to inquire about the status of an application that been pending for a certain amount of time. The process must (1) require U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services to provide a substantive response to such an inquiry, and (2) include a procedure for the applicant to escalate the inquiry if no response is provided. DHS must also publish on its website and submit to Congress quarterly reports about the backlog. These reports shall include an annual report that contains information including (1) an analysis of factors contributing to the backlog, (2) a description of existing efforts to address the backlog, (3) state-by-state backlog data, and (4) approval and denial rates for each immigration benefit type. The Government Accountability Office shall publish on its website and submit to Congress reports every two years assessing DHS efforts to address the backlog and to ensure fair and accurate adjudication of immigration benefit applications.
Sponsors: Rep. Cárdenas, Tony [D-CA-29]
Target Audience
Population: Immigration benefit applicants
Estimated Size: 15000000
- The bill aims to address the backlog in immigration applications, which impacts immigrants applying for benefits in the United States.
- Individuals waiting for immigration benefits such as visas, green cards, and other related processes will be directly affected by changes in backlog handling.
- The reporting requirements to Congress and state-by-state data release will impact stakeholders involved in policy-making and local governance related to immigration.
- The escalation process and status inquiry mechanism will likely improve service quality and transparency for applicants, leading to indirect benefits for family and sponsors as well.
Reasoning
- The bill directly impacts immigrants currently navigating the U.S. immigration system, facilitating greater transparency and potentially quicker resolution of their cases.
- Given the target population size, not every individual is impacted at the same level; some may be more affected due to the type of immigration benefit they are seeking or their current stage in the application process.
- It is important to include both individuals directly experiencing backlogs and peripheral stakeholders, such as family members, employers, or community organizations.
- The budget constraints suggest the implementation might not fully resolve all backlog issues but rather aim to make substantial improvements and lay groundwork for ongoing monitoring and adjustments.
Simulated Interviews
Software Engineer (Houston, TX)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I really hope this new process will speed things up; the wait is quite stressful.
- More transparency would definitely keep applicants like me informed and less anxious.
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 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Restaurant Owner (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could be crucial for my family's future; the wait is unbearable sometimes.
- Having accurate data and a path to escalate issues would be a game changer.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
PhD Student (Miami, FL)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm uncertain how much this will affect me, but knowing the process has transparency is reassuring.
- I hope by the time I apply for a work visa, things will be improved.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Construction Worker (Chicago, IL)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 3
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The backlog has been very frustrating for my family and me.
- Finally having a system to know what’s happening with my case could bring some peace.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 3 |
Immigration Lawyer (Seattle, WA)
Age: 54 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- My clients would greatly benefit from this level of transparency and accountability.
- It could reduce anxiety during the application waiting period and allow me to provide better support.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 7 |
Graphic Designer (New York, NY)
Age: 26 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I worry about how long these processes take and what can happen if delays continue.
- Even if it doesn’t impact me directly now, improvements can help in my future plans.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 5 |
Policy Analyst (Washington, D.C.)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This reporting increase will be vital for ongoing analysis and policy adjustment.
- It allows a better understanding of what's happening on the ground.
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 |
Community Organizer (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 42 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could empower the communities I work with by letting them feel heard.
- Knowing what’s causing delays can help us strategize support better.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 6 |
Research Scientist (Boston, MA)
Age: 31 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Transparency is key; the process feels so opaque right now.
- I'm hopeful this act can bring some timeliness to decisions.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 4 |
Teacher (Dallas, TX)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Every delay feels like it's taking away time we could be building our life here.
- The escalation process could really ease the frustration of being in the dark.
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 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $8200000 (Low: $7200000, High: $9200000)
Year 2: $6400000 (Low: $5700000, High: $7100000)
Year 3: $6400000 (Low: $5700000, High: $7100000)
Year 5: $6500000 (Low: $5800000, High: $7200000)
Year 10: $6600000 (Low: $5900000, High: $7300000)
Year 100: $6700000 (Low: $6000000, High: $7400000)
Key Considerations
- Initial costs are largely driven by technological upgrades and increased staffing.
- Long-term savings are likely to accrue from increased efficiency and streamlined processes.
- The impact on GDP and tax revenue hinges significantly on successfully reducing backlogs.