Policy Impact Analysis - 117/S/3665

Bill Overview

Title: Asylum Seeker Work Authorization Act of 2022

Description: This bill directs the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to provide employment authorization for eligible asylum applicants. Currently, such individuals are not entitled to employment authorization but may be granted such by the Department of Justice. DHS must grant employment authorization to an asylum seeker (1) who is not in detention, (2) whose application for asylum has not been deemed frivolous, and (3) whose identity has been checked against certain databases. Such employment authorization shall last for one year and be renewable for one-year terms during the period necessary to adjudicate the applicant's asylum claim. The bill also shortens the waiting period for receiving employment authorization to 30 days from the filing of the asylum application.

Sponsors: Sen. Collins, Susan M. [R-ME]

Target Audience

Population: Asylum seekers

Estimated Size: 900000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Asylum seeker (former teacher) (New York, NY)

Age: 29 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 3

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The ability to work would allow me to support myself and reduce reliance on charities.
  • Working sooner rather than later helps maintain my skills and dignity.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 3
Year 2 6 3
Year 3 7 4
Year 5 8 5
Year 10 9 6
Year 20 9 6

Asylum seeker (former engineer) (San Diego, CA)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 4

Duration of Impact: 4.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Employment authorization is crucial for the well-being of my family.
  • Shortening the waiting period reduces the uncertainty and stress significantly.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 4
Year 2 7 4
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 8 6
Year 10 9 7
Year 20 9 7

Community advocate (Houston, TX)

Age: 38 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy is a positive step toward economic self-reliance for asylum seekers.
  • It could reduce strain on social support systems.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 8 6
Year 5 8 6
Year 10 8 7
Year 20 8 7

Small business owner (Chicago, IL)

Age: 56 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Granting work visas quickly could help fill vacancies and support my business.
  • I am cautiously optimistic about the policy's implementation.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 7
Year 2 8 7
Year 3 7 7
Year 5 7 7
Year 10 7 6
Year 20 7 6

Student (Miami, FL)

Age: 23 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 6.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy could ease economic barriers for many asylum seekers, benefiting communities.
  • Increased access to work will empower individuals and families.

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 7 6
Year 10 7 6
Year 20 7 6

Teacher (Seattle, WA)

Age: 41 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 8.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy could have a significant educational impact by allowing children of asylum seekers to be in stable environments.
  • It might indirectly affect my classroom positively.

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 8 6
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 8 6

Asylum seeker (farmer) (Dallas, TX)

Age: 50 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 2

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 2/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Being able to work would mean the world to me and my family.
  • It would allow me to contribute to society rather than depend on aid.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 4 2
Year 2 5 2
Year 3 6 3
Year 5 6 4
Year 10 7 5
Year 20 7 5

Social worker (Los Angeles, CA)

Age: 34 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • An increase in work permits should be coupled with anti-discrimination efforts.
  • This policy is a step forward but requires robust support systems for it to work effectively.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 6 5
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 7 6
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 8 6

Asylum seeker (former IT professional) (Atlanta, GA)

Age: 27 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 3

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Quick work authorization would allow me to practice and enhance my professional skills.
  • The policy would improve my chances of eventual integration.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 3
Year 2 6 3
Year 3 7 4
Year 5 7 5
Year 10 8 5
Year 20 8 5

Asylum seeker (former nurse) (Philadelphia, PA)

Age: 30 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 4

Duration of Impact: 4.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Work authorization will enable me to pursue relicensing and contribute to healthcare.
  • It addresses a critical need for both personal and professional growth.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 4
Year 2 7 4
Year 3 8 5
Year 5 8 6
Year 10 9 6
Year 20 9 6

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $500000000 (Low: $400000000, High: $600000000)

Year 2: $520000000 (Low: $420000000, High: $620000000)

Year 3: $530000000 (Low: $430000000, High: $630000000)

Year 5: $550000000 (Low: $450000000, High: $650000000)

Year 10: $600000000 (Low: $500000000, High: $700000000)

Year 100: $800000000 (Low: $600000000, High: $1000000000)

Key Considerations