Bill Overview
Title: Refugee Protection Act of 2022
Description: This bill modifies provisions related to asylum seekers and addresses related issues. For example, the bill (1) eliminates the statutory time limit for applying for asylum (currently one year after arriving in the United States), (2) establishes stateless protected status for individuals who are not considered a national by any country under that country’s law, and (3) requires the goal for refugee admissions for any given fiscal year to be no fewer than 125,000.
Sponsors: Sen. Leahy, Patrick J. [D-VT]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals worldwide seeking refugee status or asylum, or who are stateless
Estimated Size: 1250000
- As of mid-2023, there are an estimated 35 million refugees worldwide according to UNHCR data.
- The bill eliminates the time limit for applying for asylum, potentially affecting existing and future asylum seekers who are either already in or planning to come to the United States.
- The establishment of stateless protected status affects individuals who are not recognized as nationals by any state, estimated to be in the millions globally.
- The requirement for a minimum of 125,000 refugee admissions annually to the U.S. will affect prospective refugees globally.
Reasoning
- This policy primarily affects asylum seekers and stateless individuals and aims to provide them with greater opportunities and protections. By removing the statutory one-year time limit for asylum applications, it potentially increases the number of eligible asylum applicants within the U.S., particularly for those who may have missed previous deadlines. This change could have varying impacts on wellbeing depending on individuals' current situations and integration into society.
- The establishment of a stateless protected status could improve the lives of individuals who have no recognized nationality, offering them security and access to resources. This has the potential to positively affect their wellbeing, though the level of impact may vary depending on their current circumstances in the U.S.
- The policy mandates a minimum of 125,000 refugee admissions per year, which could lead to increased pressure on U.S. immigration and support systems. However, if managed well, this could significantly improve the lives of newly admitted refugees.
- To understand the impact comprehensively, the interview candidates include individuals who are currently or potentially impacted as well as those unaffected to assess broader societal perspectives.
Simulated Interviews
Tech industry employee (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 25 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The removal of the one-year limit for asylum application gives me relief; I missed the deadline but now can apply.
- I am hopeful this policy will improve my stability and future prospects.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Construction worker (Buffalo, NY)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Gaining stateless protected status providing assurance and rights makes a huge difference for me.
- The policy might give me additional security in my employment and life.
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 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Small business owner (Dallas, TX)
Age: 30 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Increasing refugee admissions is a positive step—more people can have opportunities like I did.
- The policy seems promising for those awaiting opportunities in more stable environments.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
NGO worker (Miami, FL)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy may ease my organization’s challenges—we see many who need to apply after the one-year deadline.
- I hope it brings much-needed clarity and support for the people I work with.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Teacher (Fresno, CA)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While I support helping refugees, our schools need better support to accommodate increasing numbers.
- The policy could have a downstream impact on educational resources if not managed well.
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 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 8 |
Retired (Portland, OR)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I see the policy as a step forward, but I emphasize holistic integration for arrivals.
- Volunteers like myself may need additional resources and training to support new policies effectively.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
University student (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 22 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This makes studying and contributing to refugee policy more critical and timely.
- There's potential for improved systemic support, but robust policies still need execution.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Lawyer specializing in asylum cases (New York, NY)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy changes could increase my caseload significantly, necessitating expanded legal support services.
- It's a positive change overall, but stress on legal systems must be considered.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Refugee and immigrant community leader (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Seeing more community members gain security is encouraging—but integration support must keep pace.
- The policy gives hope but also requires substantial community effort to execute effectively.
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 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Healthcare professional (Chicago, IL)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Healthcare systems need to manage increase responsibly to maintain quality care.
- Policy must consider secondary effects like healthcare demands.
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 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $4500000000 (Low: $4000000000, High: $5000000000)
Year 2: $4600000000 (Low: $4100000000, High: $5100000000)
Year 3: $4700000000 (Low: $4200000000, High: $5200000000)
Year 5: $4900000000 (Low: $4400000000, High: $5400000000)
Year 10: $5200000000 (Low: $4700000000, High: $5700000000)
Year 100: $8000000000 (Low: $7000000000, High: $9000000000)
Key Considerations
- Successful implementation depends on adequate resourcing and coordination among federal, state, and local governments and agencies.
- It is critical to account for both immediate resettlement costs and longer-term integration strategies to maximize benefits.
- Political and public support may influence the feasibility and effectiveness of the proposed policy changes.