Eliminating Per-Country Caps For Green Card Applications

As the United States faces increasingly stiff competition in the STEM (science, technology, engineering, and math) and AI (artificial intelligence) fields, there have been growing efforts to streamline the immigration process to facilitate the entry of high-skilled labor. Many advocates recognizing the importance of attracting the best and brightest in these fields were hopeful the Biden administration would take action to make one important reform that could effectively streamline the green card process and attract top foreign talent: eliminating the per-country cap on green card applications. To the disappointment of many, however, the Biden administration did not push this agenda forward, but we remain at a critical time for Congress and the Trump administration to act now. The process by which immigrant visas are allocated has not changed in more than 25 years, and this antiquated system no longer addresses the flexibility and labor market demands we face today.

Currently, U.S. law imposes per-country caps on the number of employment-based and family-based green cards issued annually. The immigration selection framework created as a result of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1990 (INA)¹, placed an annual limit of 140,000 employment-based green cards. The INA also established five categories of employment-based green cards, allocating the 140,000 immigrant visas among them, with 40,000 visas reserved for the first three categories, and 10,000 visas each for the EB-4 and EB-5 categories. The INA further limits the maximum number of green cards that can be allocated to foreign nationals of a specific country to no more than 7% of the total green card issuance for a particular year.²

The Drawbacks of the Current System

The problems with per-country limits have been long identified: they hinder U.S. employers' ability to access the skilled workforce they require, thereby stifling innovation and economic growth; and they unfairly discriminate against immigrants purely based on their country of origin, especially those from countries with higher immigration rates, like China and India.

Historically, immigrants have provided significant contributions to our country's growth and development. In the age of rapidly advancing technology, particularly in STEM and AI, the loss of labor supply due to an aging population, the demand for high-skilled talent in the fields is as important as ever, yet the backlog means U.S. employers are unable to attract and retain highly skilled professionals. The backlog also means that many qualified applicants are left waiting indefinitely, often leading them to seek opportunities in countries with more favorable immigration policies, which will stifle the U.S.'s long-term economic competitiveness. The Bipartisan Policy Center stresses that "the U.S. cannot rely on domestic labor alone to meet its ambitious goals. Immigration, particularly high-skilled and with some targeting to specific areas, will be vital in ensuring that the desired outcomes from major industrial investments are realized."³

The per country limits also create inequalities that disproportionately affect applicants from certain countries, especially those with high immigration rates like India, China, and the Philippines. For example, the current wait time for Indian nationals with advanced degree is currently an absurd 150 years, according to the Cato Institute.⁴

As the most recent USCIS data shows, China and India, who have large populations of highly skilled labor, continue to constitute the populations with the longer waiting times for available visas, especially in the employment-based second (EB-2) and third preference (EB-3) as indicated in the chart below⁵:

Moreover, the emotional and psychological toll of prolonged waiting times cannot be overlooked. For families waiting years to reunite, the uncertainty is often more than just a logistical issue; it leads to instability as a result of family separation, education interruptions, mental hardship, and career progression. A recent study by fwd.us, a bi-partisan organization that advocates for immigration reform, contends that the especially long wait times have discouraged foreign talent from pursuing their green cards and returning to their countries of origin.⁶ For example, under the current system, Indian professionals, who are often highly skilled and qualified, will wait decades for their green cards. These prolonged wait times not only hinder personal and professional growth but also deter talented individuals from considering the U.S. as their destination for employment or family reunification.

Benefits to Removing the Immigrant Visa Limits

Reforming the per-country cap system is essential to "level the playing field", and allow U.S. employers to sponsor foreign worker based on conventional labor market criteria rather than availability.⁷ Moreover, it would improve the competitiveness of U.S. businesses since reducing the cap would encourage more high skilled workers to come to the United States and become lawful permanent residents [LPR].

Even more, the economic gains from eliminating the per-country cap are significant. A recent report from the Bipartisan Policy Center (BPC), Green Light to Growth, emphasizes the potential gains in gross domestic product from clearing out these backlogs.⁸ Based on their methodology, BPC estimates that clearing both employment- and family-based backlogs would increase GDP by $3.9 trillion USD over ten years.⁹ They estimate that clearing the employment-based green card by itself would increase GDP by $250 billion per the below chart:

SOURCE: Bipartisan Policy Center, Green Light to Growth, p. 16.

The BPC authors assert that part of the GDP gains would be due to higher rates of productivity because of the influx of new highly skilled entrants. Not only would new entrants increase the size of the labor force, at a time when the current U.S. work force is aging, but also, they bring new skills and forms of knowledge.¹⁰ Indeed, the authors assert that 99% of the impact of eliminating per-country caps would come from new entrants rather than those already in the country seeking to adjust status.¹¹

"Given that our immigration system sets aside more employment-based visas for those entering with higher levels of skill and education," the authors contend, "it is reasonable to assume that employment-based immigration would have larger productivity impacts." Furthermore, "there is evidence that foreign STEM talent has a significant import on total factor productivity growth in U.S. cities."¹² The BPC report also stresses that while the highest economic benefits would go to states that already have high immigration populations such as California, New York, Texas, and Florida, all states would enjoy an economic boost, most getting at least $1 billion USD in additional GDP.¹³

Conclusion

Eliminating per-country caps for green card applications would promote a more equitable and efficient immigration system. By addressing the inequalities currently inherent in the system, the U.S. can better harness the talents of skilled workers and foster economic growth. A more flexible immigration process would also create a more inclusive environment for immigrants from all backgrounds, allowing for a richer and more diverse society.

While the efforts to reform the immigration system face significant challenges, continued advocacy and dialogue among stakeholders remain essential. As the U.S. continues to evaluate its immigration policies, prioritizing fairness, efficiency, and the well-being of all individuals seeking to contribute to the nation is essential.

Footnotes

1 https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/COMPS-1374/pdf/COMPS-1374.pdf

2 A survey of the INA and per-country caps can be found in William A. Kandel, "The Employment-Based Immigration Backlog," Congressional Research Service, March 26, 2020: The Employment-Based Immigration Backlog (congress.gov); Muzaffar Chishti and Stephen Yale-Loehr, "The Immigration Act of 1990: Unfinished Business a Quarter-Century Later," Migration Policy Institute, July 2016: The Immigration Act of 1990: Unfinished Business a Quarter-Century Later (migrationpolicy.org). See also: Arturo Castellanos-Canales. "Bill Analysis: Eliminating Backlog Act of 2023." National Immigration Forum," March 30, 2023: Bill Analysis: Eliminating Backlogs Act of 2023 - National Immigration Forum.

3 Jack Malde, "The Importance of Immigration for U.S. Competitiveness," Bipartisan Research Center, July 11, 2023: The Importance of Immigration for U.S. Competitiveness | Bipartisan Policy Center

4 David J. Bier, "150-Year Wait for Indian Immigrants with Advanced Degrees," Cato Institute, June 8, 2018: 150-Year Wait for Indian Immigrants With Advanced Degrees | Cato at Liberty Blog

5 Department of Homeland Security, USCIS, "Form I-140, I-360, I-526 Approved Employment-Based Petitions Awaiting Visa Availability By Preference Category and Country of Birth as of June 2024." Immigration and Citizenship Data | USCIS

6 "Per-Country Cap Reform: Priority Bill Spotlight," Fwd.us, December 5, 2023: Per-Country Cap Reform - Priority Bill Spotlight - Fwd.us

7 Kandel (2018), p. 17

8 Jack Malde et al. Green Light to Growth: The Economic Benefits of Clearing Green Card Backlogs, Washington DC: Bipartisan Policy Center [hereinafter "BPC"], November 2023: bipartisanpolicy.org/download/?file=/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/WEB_BPC_Immigration-Green-Light-to-Growth_R01.pdf

9 BPC, Green Light to Growth, p. 16

10 BPC, Green Light, p. 13.

11 BPC, Green Light, p. 17.

12 BPC, Green Light, p. 17.

13 See the chart on p. 19 of BPC, Green Light.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.