Tag: Congress

  • US Congress urged to crack down on student overstays

    US Congress urged to crack down on student overstays

    Over 7,000 of these student and exchange visitors that overstayed their visas came from India, house representatives heard in a committee hearing on immigration enforcement in the US on January 22.  

    “Thirty-two countries have student/exchange visitor overstay rates of higher than 20%,” Jessica Vaughan, director of policy studies at the anti-immigration think-tank, the Center for Immigration Studies, told the committee.  

    However, sector leaders have argued that Vaughan’s testimony contained “some serious and inaccurate generalisations” and relied on “faulty statistics for her claim about the student visa overstay rate,” according to NAFSA‘s director of immigration policy, Heather Stewart.  

    “International students are the most tracked non-immigrants in the US and a clear and comprehensive understanding of student visa misuse is needed if the field is to arrive at effective and appropriate solutions,” said Stewart.  

    After India, Vaughan highlighted China, Colombia and Brazil as each having more than 2,000 of their citizens overstay student/exchange visas in 2023, urging Congress to eliminate OPT and impose penalties for institutional sponsors, among a host of regulations.  

    “The F and M visa categories have [the] highest overstay rates of any of the broad categories of temporary admission,” Vaughan told committee members, with F visas used for academic study and M visas for vocational study.  

    According to recent DHS figures, the total overstay rate for student and exchange visitors in 2023 was 3.67% with a suspected in-country overstay rate of 2.86%, dropping slightly to 2.69% solely for F-1 students, with all metrics excluding Mexico and Canada.  

    Countries with highest student/exchange overstay rates by numbers (2023): 

    Country  Suspected in-country overstays  Total overstays  Total overstay rate 
    India   5,818 7,081 4.67%
    China 3,012 5,255 2.1%
    Colombia 2,792 3,223 8.29%
    Brazil 1,692 2,198 4.6%
    Source: US Homeland Security Entry/Exit Overstay Report FY 2023 

    While India, China, Colombia and Brazil recorded the largest numbers of student overstays in 2023, their overstay rate as a percentage of overall student populations in the US were relatively low.  

    It is perhaps unsurprising that India and China, whose combined student populations made up 54% of total international enrolments at US institutions in 2023/24, also saw the highest levels of visa overstays. 

    Country Total overstay rate
    Equatorial Guinea  70.18% 
    Chad   55.64%
    Eritrea  55.43% 
    Congo (Kinshasa)  50.06%
    Djibouti 43.75% 
    Burma 42.17% 
    Yemen  40.92% 
    Sierra Leone 35.83%
    Congo (Brazzaville)  35.14% 
    Togo  35.05% 
    Global (excl. Mexico + Canada) 3.67% 
    Source: US Homeland Security Entry/Exit Overstay Report FY 2023 

    Notably, the ‘in-country overstay rate’ refers to the percentage of individuals suspected to still be physically present in the US after their visa expired, while the ‘total overstay rate’ includes both those still in the country and those who may have eventually left after overstaying their visa, but were not recorded as departing. 

    Sector members have raised concerns about the “troubling” scale of the problem uncovered by the report, ranging from benign violations of legitimate students to “cases of wilful fraud”, said Eddie West and Anna Esaki-Smith, two leading US educators.  

    NAFSA, however, has disputed the figures as “unreliable”, claiming that the report “overstates” the issue and urged stakeholders to take caution when taking the figures out of context.  

    Indeed, DHS concedes that “infrastructural, operational and logistical challenges” in the exit environment make it difficult to identify students who do not depart via air or who transition from F-1 status to H-1B, legal permanent residency and other statuses.  

    What’s more, DHS data revealed a 42% decline in the suspected overstay rate for student and exchange visitors across a 15-month period ending in January 2024, indicating a lag time for the system to register students’ changing situations. 

    “Not only do visa issuance policies need to be adjusted and interior enforcement boosted, in addition Congress should amend the law in several important ways,” Vaughan told the hearing.  

    In a statement raising some concern about Vaughan’s testimony, she recommended that “the concept of dual intent should not apply to student visa applicants”. 

    Under current law, it does not.  

    While the Optional Practical Training (OPT) program has been widely proven to benefit American workers as well as international graduates, Vaughan blamed the initiative for spawning “an industry of diploma mills and fake schools”, calling for it to be eliminated or “much, much more closely regulated”.  

    Vaughan also recommended stricter regulations on H1-B specialty occupation visas, a move which Stewart warned would “immediately” make the US look less attractive to international students who “strongly consider” post-study employment opportunities when deciding where to study abroad.  

    During Donald Trump’s presidential campaign, he surprised some of the sector.

    The second-time US president spoke out in support of the H1-B visa during his presidential campaign amid a row about the work pathway among prominent Republicans.

    The US is the only one out of the ‘Big Four’ study destinations – US, UK, Australia and Canada – to publish data on international student overstay rates.

    Source link

  • One day after FIRE lawsuit, Congress passes changes to filming permits in national parks

    One day after FIRE lawsuit, Congress passes changes to filming permits in national parks

    On Wednesday, FIRE and the National Press Photographers Association filed a lawsuit challenging the arbitrary and unconstitutional laws that require Americans to apply for a permit and pay costly fees before exercising their right to film in national parks. The very next day, the U.S. Senate passed a bill addressing these same issues. The bill now goes to President Biden, who is expected to sign it in a huge victory for filmmakers — and for the First Amendment.

    Currently, filmmakers must obtain a permit and pay a fee if they intend to later profit from their footage in national parks, even if they are using the same handheld camera or phone that a tourist would use. Permits are routinely denied for arbitrary and unpredictable reasons, making it difficult for people like documentary filmmakers, press photographers, and wedding videographers to earn a living. Under the EXPLORE Act, that changes. 


    WATCH VIDEO

    The EXPLORE Act, championed in the Senate by West Virginia Democrat Joe Manchin and Wyoming Republican John Barrasso, does several things to fix the constitutional problems with the permit scheme that FIRE is challenging. First, so long as the filming takes place where the public is allowed, doesn’t impact other visitors or damage parks resources, and involves five or fewer people, no permit is required. Second, no permit is required simply because the filmmaker intends to make a profit. Third, no permit is needed to film activities that are already allowed in the park. And fourth, the EXPLORE Act makes clear that when the National Park Service has already approved an event like a wedding to take place in a national park, no additional permit is needed to film or photograph the special occasion.

    After filing, FIRE and NPPA took the story to the media and to Capitol Hill. FIRE looks forward to seeing this bill become law.

    Source link

  • FIRE to Congress: More work needed to protect free speech on college campuses

    FIRE to Congress: More work needed to protect free speech on college campuses

    What is the state of free speech on college campuses? More students now support shouting down speakers. Several institutions faced external pressure from government entities to punish constitutionally protected speech. And the number of “red light” institutions — those with policies that significantly restrict free speech — rose for the second year in a row, reversing a 15-year trend of decreasing percentages of red light schools, according to FIRE research.

    These are just a few of the concerns shared by FIRE’s Lead Counsel for Government Affairs Tyler Coward, who joined lawmakers, alumni groups, students, and stakeholders last week in a discussion on the importance of improving freedom of expression on campus.

    Rep. Greg Murphy led the roundtable, along with Rep. Virginia Foxx, Chairwoman of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, and Rep. Burgess Owens. 

    But the picture on campus isn’t all bad news. Tyler highlighted some positive developments, including: an increase in “green light” institutions — schools with written policies that do not seriously threaten student expression — along with commitments to institutional neutrality, and “more and more institutions are voluntarily abandoning their requirements that faculty and students submit so-called DEI statements for admission, application, promotion, and tenure review.”

    Tyler noted the passage of the Respecting the First Amendment on Campus Act in the House. The bill requires public institutions of higher education to “ensure their free speech policies align with Supreme Court precedent that protects students’ rights — regardless of their ideology or viewpoint.” Furthermore, crucial Title IX litigation has resulted in the Biden rules being enjoined in 26 states due to concerns over due process and free speech.

    Lastly, Tyler highlighted areas of concern drawn from FIRE’s surveys of students and faculty on campus, including the impact of student encampment protests on free expression on college campuses.


    WATCH VIDEO: FIRE Lead Counsel for Government Affairs Tyler Coward delivers remarks at Rep. Greg Murphy’s 4th Annual Campus Free Speech Roundtable on Dec. 11, 2024.

    Students across the political spectrum are facing backlash or threats of censorship for voicing their opinions. Jasmyn Jordan, an undergraduate student at University of Iowa and the National Chairwoman of Young Americans for Freedom, shared personal experiences of censorship YAF members have faced on campus due to their political beliefs. Gabby Dankanich, also from YAF, provided additional examples, including the Clovis Community College case. At Clovis, the administration ordered the removal of flyers YAF students posted citing a policy against “inappropriate or offensive language or themes.” (FIRE helped secure a permanent injunction on behalf of the students. Additionally, Clovis’s community college district will have to pay the students a total of $330,000 in damages and attorney’s fees.)  

    VICTORY: California college that censored conservative students must pay $330,000, adopt new speech-protective policy, and train staff

    Press Release

    Federal court orders Clovis and three other community colleges to stop discriminating against student-group speech based on viewpoint.


    Read More

    Conservative students aren’t the only ones facing challenges in expressing their ideas on campus. Kenny Xu, executive director of Davidsonians for Free Speech and Discourse, emphasized that free speech is not a partisan issue. Citing FIRE data, he noted that 70% of students feel at least somewhat uncomfortable publicly disagreeing with a professor in class. “I can assure you that 70% of students are not conservatives,” he remarked. Kyle Beltramini from the American Council of Trustees and Alumni, reinforced this point. Sharing findings from ACTA’s own research, he emphasized that “this is not a problem faced by a single group of students but rather an experience shared across the ideological spectrum.”

    The roundtable identified faculty as a critical part of the solution, though they acknowledged faculty members often fear speaking up. FIRE’s recent survey of over 6,000 faculty across 55 U.S. colleges and universities supports this claim. According to the results, “35% of faculty say they recently toned down their writing for fear of controversy, compared to 9% who said the same during the McCarthy era.”

    While this data underscores the challenges faculty face, it also points to a broader issue within higher education. Institutions, Tyler said, have a dual obligation to “ensure that speech rights are protected” and that “students remain free from harassment based on a protected characteristic.” Institutions did not get this balance right this year. But, ACTA’s Kyle Beltramini noted the positive development that these longstanding issues have finally migrated into the public consciousness: “By and large, policy makers and the public have been unaware of the vast censorial machines that colleges and universities have been building up to police free speech, enforce censorship, and maintain ideological hegemony in the name of protecting and supporting their students,” he stated. This moment presents an opportunity to provide constructive feedback to institutions to hopefully address these shortcomings.

    FIRE thanks Rep. Murphy for the opportunity to contribute to this vital conversation. We remain committed to working with legislators who share our dedication to fostering a society that values free inquiry and expression.

    Alumni are also speaking up, and at the roundtable they shared their perspectives on promoting free speech and intellectual diversity in higher education. Among them was Tom Neale, UVA alumnus and president of The Jefferson Council and the Alumni Free Speech Alliance, who highlighted the importance of connecting with alumni from institutions like Cornell, Davidson, and Princeton, since they’re “all united by their common goal to restore true intellectual diversity and civil discourse in American higher-ed.”

    Other participants at the roundtable included members of Speech First, and Princetonians for Free Speech. 

    So what can be done? Participants proposed several solutions, including passing legislation that prohibits the use of political litmus tests in college admissions, hiring, and promotion decisions. They also suggested integrating First Amendment education into student orientation programs to ensure incoming undergraduates understand their rights and responsibilities on campus. Additionally, they emphasized the importance of developing programs that teach students how to engage constructively in disagreements — rather than resorting to censorship — and to promote curiosity, dissent, talking across lines of difference, and an overall culture of free expression on campus. 

    FIRE thanks Rep. Murphy for the opportunity to contribute to this vital conversation. We remain committed to working with legislators who share our dedication to fostering a society that values free inquiry and expression.

    You can watch the roundtable on Rep. Murphy’s YouTube channel.

    Source link

  • Congress Introduces Legislation on Employee Classification of Student-Athletes – CUPA-HR

    Congress Introduces Legislation on Employee Classification of Student-Athletes – CUPA-HR

    by CUPA-HR | June 18, 2024

    On June 13, the House Education and Workforce Committee voted to advance H.R. 8534, the Protecting Student Athletes’ Economic Freedom Act. The bill would prohibit student-athletes from being classified as employees under federal and state labor laws and regulations due to their participation in intercollegiate athletics.

    The bill was introduced on May 23 by Rep. Bob Good (R-VA) and 10 House Republicans. If enacted, the bill would prohibit student-athletes from being classified as employees at institutions of higher education, athletic conferences or athletic associations (such as the NCAA). In effect, the legislation would prohibit student-athletes from being classified as employees under federal labor laws, such as the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), as well as state laws and regulations determining employment classification.

    Throughout the Biden administration’s first term, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has issued significant guidance and decisions with respect to the classification of student-athletes as employees. In September 2021, the NLRB’s general counsel issued a memorandum asserting the agency’s position that student-athletes are considered employees under the NLRA. The memorandum was followed by an NLRB complaint filed against the University of Southern California, the Pac-12 Conference and the NCAA for allegedly misclassifying USC’s men’s football and men’s and women’s basketball players as student-athletes rather than employees. Additionally, in March 2024, the Dartmouth College men’s basketball team voted in favor of joining the Service Employees International Union, after a regional NLRB director determined that players on the team are employees under the NLRA using the board’s general counsel memorandum.

    The bill passed out of committee by a partisan vote of 23-16, only gaining support from Republicans on the committee. The bill now awaits a full House vote, where Republicans can pass the bill with a simple majority. The fate of the bill is more uncertain in the Senate, as it is unlikely that it will gain enough support from Democrats to bypass the 60-vote filibuster. CUPA-HR will keep members apprised of any updates relating to this bill and employee classification of student-athletes generally.



    Source link

  • Congress and Federal Agencies Consider Paid-Leave Proposals and Protections for Pregnant and Nursing Workers – CUPA-HR

    Congress and Federal Agencies Consider Paid-Leave Proposals and Protections for Pregnant and Nursing Workers – CUPA-HR

    by CUPA-HR | May 24, 2023

    Over the past year, lawmakers have taken an increased interest in establishing and expanding upon benefits and protections for paid leave and pregnant workers. As a result, Congress passed two bills granting workplace protections to pregnant and nursing mothers at the end of 2022, while  considering new federal proposals for paid family and medical leave. This post details some of the recent actions taken by lawmakers toward a federal paid-leave policy, as well as updates from federal agencies on the enforcement of the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA) and the Providing Urgent Maternal Protections (PUMP) for Nursing Mothers Act.

    Bipartisan Working Group on Paid Leave

    In April, a group of bipartisan lawmakers in the House of Representatives established the Bipartisan Paid Family Leave Working Group, the goal of which “is to create a bipartisan paid family leave policy that supports American families and businesses.” The group consists of three Republicans — Reps. Stephanie Bice (R-OK), Julia Letlow (R-LA) and Mariannette Miller-Meeks (R-IA) — and three Democrats — Reps. Chrissy Houlahan (D-PA), Colin Allred (D-TX) and Haley Stevens (D-MI).

    In a letter establishing the working group, the lawmakers expressed their intention to explore both state and federal policies that already exist with the goal of creating an established paid-leave policy. The letter discusses both the successes and areas to improve of the Family and Medical Leave Act, and it states that there is a bipartisan consensus that paid leave is an issue that needs to become law.

    FAMILY Act

    On May 17, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) and Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) reintroduced the FAMILY Act, which would grant up to 12 weeks of paid leave for employees at companies of all sizes through funds collected by payroll taxes paid by both employees and employers. The FAMILY Act was first introduced in 2013, but the most recent bill expands upon previous text by creating a progressive scale for wage replacement during the time off. Under the bill, the lowest paid workers would be eligible to receive up to 85 percent of their wages during their time off, while the average full-time worker would receive approximately two-thirds of their wages. Additionally, the bill extends coverage to include time off taken to address personal incidents with domestic violence, stalking and/or sexual assault.

    While most Democrats have championed the FAMILY Act as their preferred proposal for paid leave, the bill is unlikely to gain Republican support and will therefore not pass the House during this Congress. Republicans have previously opposed the bill, arguing against the proposed tax increases as well as potential burdens employers may face as a result of a paid-leave mandate. Instead, Republicans who have shown interest in advancing paid-leave policies have considered programs allowing individuals to borrow from their Social Security funds, incentivizing the creation of a private insurance system for leave pay, and providing tax credits to pay for time off.

    PUMP for Nursing Mothers Act

    On May 18, the Department of Labor Wage and Hour Division (WHD) issued a Field Assistance Bulletin (FAB) with enforcement information and public guidance for the PUMP for Nursing Mothers Act. The law went into effect on April 28, after being included in the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2023 year-end legislation to fund the federal government.

    As a reminder, the PUMP for Nursing Mothers Act amends the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) to expand access to breastfeeding accommodations in the workplace for lactating employees and builds on existing protections in the 2010 Break Time for Nursing Mothers Provision by broadening breastfeeding accommodations and workplace protections. Specifically, the bill ensures reasonable time and space for working individuals to pump in their workplaces as well as remedies for employer violations of the act.

    The FAB provides details on the requirements for reasonable space and break time, compensation, and employer posting of FLSA requirements as provided under the PUMP for Nursing Mothers Act. Employers and field staff alike may use the FAB document as a resource to understand compliance with the act as enforced by WHD.

    Pregnant Workers Fairness Act

    Alongside the PUMP for Nursing Mothers Act, the PWFA was also signed into law under the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2023. The effective date of the PWFA is June 27, and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) was expected to issue proposed regulations on how best to govern and enforce the PWFA by then.

    As of May, however, the EEOC has yet to release any proposed regulations, and it seems likely that the agency will not be able to issue a proposed rule by the June 27 date. The commission currently has two Democratic and two Republican commissioners, and given the need for a majority of commissioners to vote to advance a rulemaking, the agency is unable to move proposed rules forward because commissioners are split along party lines. Through the legislation, Congress has allowed the EEOC through the end of 2023 to finalize a rulemaking on the PWFA, which may or may not be achieved,  depending on whether the Senate is able to confirm Kalpana Kotagal as the third Democratic appointee on the commission. In lieu of the proposed rulemaking, the EEOC has issued guidance on the law through an FAQ webpage addressing the protections granted under the law, which stakeholders may use as they wait for the official regulations.

    CUPA-HR continues to monitor any developments related to these proposals and laws and will keep members apprised of any policy updates related to paid leave and protections for pregnant and nursing workers.



    Source link

  • Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act Reauthorization Prospects for the 118th Congress – CUPA-HR

    Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act Reauthorization Prospects for the 118th Congress – CUPA-HR

    by CUPA-HR | February 15, 2023

    In the 118th Congress, bills will likely be introduced to reauthorize the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA), which includes programs used by community colleges and other higher education institutions pursuing their own workforce development agendas. Passed in July 2014, the WIOA is the primary federal law to increase access to and coordination between workforce development and other related programs. This blog post provides context on what the WIOA accomplishes and highlights recent attempts to reauthorize the law.

    Background

    There are four major components to the WIOA:

    • Title I includes programs related to workforce development activities and authorizes three formula grants through federally-funded, state- and locally-administered delivery systems that are administered by the Department of Labor.
    • Title II enacts the Adult Education and Family Literacy Act (AEFLA), which authorizes programs for adult education up to the secondary level, as well as English training, and is administered by the Department of Education.
    • Title III amends the Wagner-Peyser Act, which authorizes the Employment Service formula grant program that is essential to the WIOA for planning and accountability purposes.
    • Title IV amends the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and provides funding to state agencies to support employment-related services to individuals with disabilities, among other smaller programs.

    The WIOA originally funded its programs from fiscal year 2015 to fiscal year 2020 after most WIOA programs went into effect July 2015. Appropriations authorization for the WIOA was set to expire after fiscal year 2020, but Congress has extended authorization through the annual appropriations process since fiscal year 2021. Despite the extended authorization, Congress has tasked itself with producing a reauthorization of the WIOA that will extend appropriations for another five or more years and help modernize its workforce development programs. We will likely see reauthorization legislation in the House and/or Senate before the current term ends in 2025.

    WIOA Reauthorization Attempt in the 117th Congress

    In the 117th Congress, House Education and Labor Committee Chair Bobby Scott (D-VA) and 17 committee Democrats introduced the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act of 2022 (H.R. 7309, “WIOA reauthorization bill”) and sent it to the House floor for a vote. According to a Congressional Research Service (CRS) report on H.R. 7309, the bill “would retain the general structure and systems established by the WIOA” and would “authorize appropriations for fiscal years 2023 through 2028, increasing funding for existing systems and establishing several new programs.” The CRS report specifies that the WIOA reauthorization bill focused mostly on amending Title I of the law.

    On May 17, 2022, the House passed the WIOA reauthorization bill and sent it to the Senate where the bill stalled in the Senate Help, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee until the 117th Congress adjourned. The WIOA reauthorization bill passed the House among mostly partisan lines with 216 Democrats and four Republicans voting in favor of the bill and 196 Republicans voting against it.

    House Republicans criticized Scott and other Democrats on the Education and Labor Committee for failing to collaborate with Republicans to create a bipartisan bill prior to its introduction and during the committee markup. Prior to its final House vote, Education and Labor Committee Ranking Member Virginia Foxx (R-NC) spoke out against the bill on the House floor stating that the Democrats’ bill did not create a workforce development system that prepares workers for in-demand skills.

    Potential for WIOA Reauthorization Attempts in the 118th Congress

    Given a divided House and Senate, both chambers will have to work together to pass any meaningful legislation for a WIOA reauthorization. Democrats and Republicans may be incentivized to produce a consensus WIOA reauthorization bill to address the record labor shortages and resulting open positions that employers are struggling to fill across the country. With Foxx now serving as the chair of the House Education and the Workforce Committee and her interest in WIOA reauthorization during the last Congress, we believe she and other House Republicans will introduce a new bill, though it’s unknown whether they’ll be able to come to an agreement with Democrats in both the House and Senate to finalize and pass a new reauthorization bill.

    Without knowing how or when Congress will consider WIOA reauthorization, we are more certain of members who may be House champions of such a bill. In addition to Full Committee Chair Foxx and Ranking Member Scott, House Higher Education and Workforce Development Subcommittee leaders Burgess Owens (R-UT) and Frederica Wilson (D-FL) will be involved in WIOA reauthorization bills that are introduced in this Congress. Less certain is where new Senate HELP leaders Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Bill Cassidy (R-LA) will stand on this particular issue given the Senate’s lack of action in the last Congress and each senator’s new ascension to top leadership positions of the HELP Committee.

    CUPA-HR will monitor WIOA reauthorization bills this Congress and keep members apprised of any new developments.



    Source link

  • House Education and Workforce Committee and Senate HELP Committee Set for 118th Congress – CUPA-HR

    House Education and Workforce Committee and Senate HELP Committee Set for 118th Congress – CUPA-HR

    by CUPA-HR | February 7, 2023

    After a month in session, the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate are finalizing their committee and subcommittee membership rosters. Of particular significance are the House Education and the Workforce Committee and Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee, which have jurisdiction over higher education and many labor and employment issues, including overtime, paid leave, occupational safety and health and employment-based discrimination.

    House Education and the Workforce Committee and Subcommittees

    The House Education and the Workforce Committee will be comprised of 25 Republicans and 20 Democrats with Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC) serving as chairwoman and Rep. Bobby Scott (D-VA) serving as ranking member of the full committee. Both Foxx and Scott served as their party’s committee leader in the previous Congress when Democrats held the majority, but Foxx was notably able to secure a waiver granting her exemption from House Republican-imposed committee leadership term limits that would have prohibited her from serving a fourth consecutive term as Republican leader on the committee.

    Foxx has publicly stated her priorities for the committee, citing oversight of the Biden administration, Department of Labor and Department of Education as a top concern for the committee. Having previously taught at two institutions of higher education and served as president at Mayland Community College, Foxx also has a particular interest in higher education. With divided control of Congress and Democrat control of the Senate, however, it is unlikely that Foxx will be able to pass any meaningful legislation that would garner support from the Senate and the president.

    In addition to the full committee roster, the Education and the Workforce Committee has also finalized their subcommittee rosters.

    Subcommittee on Workforce Protections

    The Subcommittee on Workforce Protections has jurisdiction over issues relating to wages, hours of workers and overtime, including the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA); workers’ compensation, including the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA); issues relating to immigration and employment; and occupational safety and health, including the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA).

    Freshman Rep. Kevin Kiley (R-CA) will serve as chairman of the subcommittee and Rep. Alma Adams (D-NC) will serve as ranking member after serving as chair of the subcommittee last Congress. The subcommittee will made be up of six Republicans, including Glenn Grothman (R-WI), James Comer (R-KY), Mary Miller (R-IL) and Eric Burlison (R-MO), all who did not serve on the subcommittee in the previous Congress; and four Democrats, all who served on the subcommittee in the last Congress.

    Subcommittee on Higher Education and Workforce Development

    The Subcommittee on Higher Education and Workforce Development has jurisdiction over the following areas: postsecondary student assistance and employment services, and the Higher Education Act; postsecondary career and technical education, apprenticeship programs, and workforce development; and science and technology programs.

    Rep. Owen Burgess (R-UT) will serve as chairman of the Subcommittee on Higher Education and Workforce Development, while Rep. Frederica S. Wilson (D-FL) will serve as ranking member of the subcommittee after serving as chair of the subcommittee in the 117th Congress. The makeup of the subcommittee will include 13 Republicans, including Reps. Glenn Thompson (R-PA), Lloyd Smucker (R-PA), Nathaniel Moran (R-TX), John James (R-MI), Lori Chavez-DeRemer (R-OR), Erin Houchin (R-IN) and Brandon Williams (R-NY) as new members; and 11 Democrats, including Reps. Lucy McBath (D-GA), Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan (D-Northern Marina Islands) and Alma Adams (D-NC) as new members.

    Subcommittee on Health, Employment, Labor and Pensions

    The Subcommittee on Health, Employment, Labor and Pensions’ jurisdiction involves “matters dealing with relations between employers and employees,” including to the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) and employment-related health and retirement security, such as pension, health and other employee benefits and the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA).

    The subcommittee will see Rep. Bob Good (R-VA) serve as chairman and Rep. Mark DeSaulnier (D-CA) serve as ranking member after previously serving as chair in the 117th Congress. The subcommittee will be composed of 12 Republicans, including Reps. James Comer (R-KY), Lloyd Smucker (R-PA), Michelle Steele (R-C), Aaron Bean (R-FL), Eric Burlison (R-MO), Lori Chavez-DeRemer (R-OR) and Erin Houchin (R-IN) serving as new members; and 10 Democrats, including Reps. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA), Jahana Hayes (D-CT), Ilhan Omar (D-MN) and Kathy Manning (D-NC) serving as new members.

    Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee

    The Senate HELP Committee is the Senate counterpart to the House Education and the Workforce Committee. Chair Bernie Sanders (I-VT) will be replacing former Chair Patty Murray (D-WA), who is now the chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, and Ranking Member Bill Cassidy (R-LA) will be replacing former Ranking Member Richard Burr (R-NC), who retired at the end of the 117th Congress. Democrats will have 11 members and Republicans will have 10 members on the committee. Subcommittees have not yet been finalized, though we expect to see membership lists soon.

    Sanders staffers have stated that, as chair, he will “focus on universal healthcare, lowering the cost of prescription drugs, increasing access to higher education and protecting workers’ rights on the job.” As previously mentioned, however, the divided Congress and Republican control of the House will likely prevent meaningful legislation from moving to President Biden’s desk for his signature.

    CUPA-HR will be monitoring committee activity and will keep members apprised of any major hearings or updates that come out of the committees.



    Source link

  • CUPA-HR Sends Letter to Congress Asking for DACA Protections – CUPA-HR

    CUPA-HR Sends Letter to Congress Asking for DACA Protections – CUPA-HR

    by CUPA-HR | November 22, 2022

    On November 17, CUPA-HR joined the American Council on Education (ACE) and over 60 other higher education associations in sending a letter to House of Representatives and Senate leadership urging Congress to pass permanent protections for the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program after recent court decisions have left the status of the program in limbo.

    On October 5, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit unanimously upheld a 2021 ruling by the lower Court in the Southern District of Texas that enjoined the DACA program and vacated the 2012 Department of Homeland Security (DHS) memorandum that originally established the program. The Fifth Circuit agreed with the lower court’s finding that the promulgation and enforcement of the DACA memorandum violated the Administrative Procedure Act but noted that the Biden administration had finalized a new DACA regulation in August, leading the Appeals Court to send the case back to the Texas District Court to consider the legality of the August rulemaking. On October 14, however, the Texas District Court ruled against the final rule, arguing that the existing injunction blocking the 2012 memorandum also covered the new final rule.

    As a result of these rulings, the DHS is blocked from accepting new applications for the DACA program, but the agency is permitted to continue renewing existing protections to current DACA beneficiaries. DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas issued a statement in response to the Texas Court’s decision saying “It is clearer than ever that only the passage of legislation will give full protection and a well-deserved path to citizenship for DACA recipients. I urge Congress to swiftly pass legislation to provide permanent protection to the hundreds of thousands of Dreamers who call the United States home.”

    ACE’s letter states the urgency with which Congress needs to act to ensure protections are granted to DACA recipients. The letter specifically asks Congress to pass legislation to provide DACA protections to current and future beneficiaries before the 117th Congress ends January 3, 2023.

    CUPA-HR will keep members apprised of any updates on the status of the DACA program.



    Source link