Legislative History Reviewby Steven Song Sam Oates Claire Squire ✓ Solved

Legislative History Review By: Steven Song, Sam Oates, Claire Squire, Sabrina Chagan, and Victoria Nash SPEA-V181 Overview Over 25 million elderly Americans live in poverty, according to the National Council on Aging (2018). While this startling number requires remediation, it is estimated that half of all elderly Americans would live in poverty without Social Security. This legislation was designed to provide relief for those suffering unemployment and poverty because of the Great Depression: dependent widows, children without parents, unemployed workers, and retirees. Social Security is a pay-as-you-go system in which 6.2% of each worker’s income is taxed, up to a cap, to pay for current recipients’ benefits.

Today, the program still provides crucial benefits, but is in danger of running out of funding due to increased recipients and decreased workers. To ensure that future generations receive benefits, funding must be increased or spending cut. Previous pieces of legislation in the United States and abroad attempted address this issue: a 1983 Amendment to Social Security requires that government employees pay into the system, and in France, a 2012 bill allows citizens to opt out of receiving benefits (French-Property, p.1, 2018). The following review of current legislation reveals the importance of preserving Social Security for future generations. Unfortunately, the high voter turnout and consequent influence of America’s elderly has resulted in legislative inaction.

However, there is still time to save Social Security, and the most effective strategy to achieve that goal is the demolition of the income tax cap. Social Security Legislation 1939 Amendment- The 1939 Amendment to Social Security added two new categories of recipients to the program: spouses and minor children of retirees, and family of covered workers that died prematurely. This adjustment shifted Social Security from a worker-based program to a family-based socioeconomic security program. Additionally, the Amendment extended benefits to workers in the government, law, and agriculture sectors, as the original legislation limited receival of benefits to workers in industry and commerce. The Amendment also standardized the method of determining if a worker had worked long enough to be eligible for benefits.

1983 Amendment- Through bipartisan cooperation, the 1983 Amendment reconfigured the coverage, financing, and benefits of Social Security in response to concerns of insufficient funding. This Amendment required that government employees pay into Social Security and imposed a six-month delay in calculating the Cost of Living Adjustment, allowing for more accurate inflation adjustments, reducing extraneous increases in benefits (Blahous, 2007). Legislation in Other Jurisdictions Social Security is not limited to the United States; over 170 other countries have assistance programs (p.1). Countries fund their assistance programs in a variety of manners, including: France- Following enactment of the 2012 Social Security Financing Bill, France’s Social Security deficit was nearly halved (Gouvernement.fr, p.1, 2015).

In contrast to many countries, the majority of the funding for Social Security in France comes from contributions rather than taxation; the people of France may opt out of Social Security if they do not want to pay their employee wage contributions (French-Property, p.1, 2018). Egypt- Social and Insurance Law No. 79 of 1975 was enacted to reframe Egypt’s system and set new parameters for Social Security (Trading Economics, p.2, 2018). As a result, receival of old age pensions and disability settlements requires that citizens contribute to the Social Security tax, and typically 10 to 120 contributions are required (Social Security Administration, p.1, 2017). By observing the successes and failures of other countries’ assistance systems, the United States may discover legislative strategies that have the potential to reform Social Security for the better.

Federal Response 1970s- Social Security has continuously expanded to include more citizens, but the federal government has not likewise expanded its means of paying for the program. In the first three years of the 1970s, Social Security benefits were increased by 15, 10, and 20% respectively, and expanded to include a minimum benefit, given to retirees who had not paid into the system. Post 1970s- Since the 1970s, minimal legislation has been passed, except for the Bush Administration tax cuts of the 2000s that solidified the income tax cap, decreasing the amount that high-earning Americans contribute to Social Security. In 2017, for example, due to the income tax cap, all Americans earning income of 8,400 or higher, including the extremely wealthy, were taxed the same amount for Social Security: ,772.80.

Modern Issues- Currently, Baby Boomers are retiring at a higher rate than the rate at which young people are entering the workforce. Legislative action by the federal government is necessary, but is lacking, as ensuring future generations receive Social Security will require either that benefits be cut, or taxes raised, both of which are politically unpopular decisions that negatively impact the elderly, a powerful voting group. Improvements to Legislation Social Security faces an unknown future due to insufficient funds and a growing population dependent upon the program. Additional legislation pertaining to Social Security may help sustain the program amid great expansion of beneficiaries. To ensure younger generations receive Social Security, it is recommended that the income tax cap be lifted, requiring that all citizens be taxed 6.2% of their income.

This recommendation increases Social Security funds by eliminating the tax cap for wealthier citizens, increasing policy equity and enabling Social Security to be a fiscally viable program for years to come. Works Cited Blahous, Charles P. “The 1983 Social Security Reforms: Real and Misremembered Lessons for Today’s Leaders.†Hudson Institute, Hudson Institute, 27 Feb. 2009, rms.pdf Elderly Poverty Statistics - Economic Security. (2017, August 10). Retrieved from French-Property. (2018).

Tax France: Social Security Contributions in France. Retrieved from Gouvernement.fr. (2015). The Social Security Financing Bill For 2016. Retrieved from History.com Editors. “Social Security Act.†HISTORY, A&E Television Networks, 26 Jan.

2018, “A Hope of Many Years.†Social Security, SSA's Office of Legislation & Congressional Affairs, 24 Apr. 2015, Social Security Administration. (2017). Africa, 2017 (Egypt). Retrieved from Social Security Administration. (2017). Social Security Throughout the World.

Retrieved from “Social Security.†Social Security History, SSA's Office of Legislation & Congressional Affairs, 20 Apr. 1983, “Social Security.†Social Security History, SSA's Office of Legislation & Congressional Affairs, 26 Nov. 1984, Trading Economics. (2018). Egypt Social Security Rate for Employees (). Retrieved from this assignment, each student in the class has been assigned to a working group and a policy issue (My issue is Immigration: Advocating for Policy that Expands Immigration in the U.S.) You should develop a legislative history review for the assigned policy.

Students should be familiar with the information provided in Chapter 5 of Writing Public Policy: A Practical Guide to Communicating in the Policy Making Process by Catherine F. Smith as it addresses the process for preparing and writing a public policy legislative history document. This assignment should be written as a report (see examples on page ) regarding your group policy issue. The goal of providing a public policy legislative review is to provide knowledge of U.S. proposed or enacted law regarding a defined problem based on consulting legislative records. The product should be a written document tracing either history of a single law or history of laws on an issue.

For this assignment consider addressing the guidelines presented on pages 95 –96 that include 1) knowing why the research is needed, 2) knowing the user and the user’s purpose for the information, 3) setting the scope, 4) taking the necessary time and managing your time, and 5) using existing skills and adding needed ones. Following these guidelines, as well as completing the three tasks listed below will aid you in writing an effective legislative history review report. You can purchase it on Vital Source for 180 days and I can add the price on HW Market. Task 1: Review the legislative process (page 96 -97) Task 2: Conduct research (page ) Task 3: Write legislative history document using standard reporting format(page ) •Provide an overview that summarizes the message and key information •Divide the report into subsections that provide summaries of important information •Utilize subheadings that label each subsection •Include full citations that in addition to the required APA format include issuing agency, title, edition, publisher information, series, and notes as needed.

The textbook provides several examples of effective policy evaluation documents in Chapter 5, on pages 102–118. I recommend utilizing the style of writing presented in example 1 on page 102 as a legislative report when preparing your assignment. While there is no firm page limit, I expect most memos will be approximately 3 but not more than four(4) pages long, DoubleSpace not including your citations/sources page(s). Margins should not exceed one inch and the font must be 11 or 12-pointTimes New Roman. Please include the header or cover page for the paper as described in the syllabus, which should include the title of the assignment and submission date.

Cover pages do not count against your page limits. Students are encouraged to review Viewpoint 4: General Method of Communicating in a Policy Process (Chapter 2, p. 29 -31) and review your writing utilizing the Features of Effectiveness and Measures of Excellence checklists provided in the text (Chapter 3, p. 32 –33). The guidelines for this assignment are based upon information from Writing Public Policy: A Practical Guide to Communicating in the Policy Making Process, Third Edition, Chapter 5by Catherine F. Smith.

Paper for above instructions

Overview
The immigration policy of the United States is a critical component of its continual evolution, directly impacting the nation's economic vitality, cultural diversity, and international standing. As of 2021, U.S. immigration policy remains a subject of intense debate, underscored by challenges stemming from high unemployment rates due to the pandemic and longstanding issues of undocumented immigration. The urgency to reform immigration policy has never been greater to reflect modern economic needs and humanitarian considerations. This legislative history review traces vital immigration laws, outlines their implications, and advocates for an expansive approach to U.S. immigration policy.

Historical Context of U.S. Immigration Policy

The Immigration Act of 1924

The historical footprint of U.S. immigration policy began to solidify significantly with the Immigration Act of 1924, which imposed nationwide quotas that limited the number of immigrants allowed entry into the United States. This legislation primarily targeted immigrants from Southern and Eastern Europe and effectively barred those from Asia entirely (Ngai, 2004). This act codified a racial hierarchy in immigration policy that served long-standing prejudicial sentiments.

The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965

Decades later, the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 emerged as a landmark piece of legislation. It abolished the quota system and created a new immigration framework based on family reunification and labor market needs (Martin, 2004). This act's passage marked a pivotal shift in U.S. immigration policy, encouraging a more diverse immigration flow from Asia, Africa, and Latin America.

The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986

The Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) of 1986 was another seminal legislation. It addressed the issue of undocumented immigrants by providing a pathway to legalization for an estimated 3 million undocumented individuals who had resided in the U.S. since before 1982 (Massey & Capoferro, 2008). However, it also instituted harsh penalties for employers hiring undocumented labor, indicating a dual approach to immigration management that persists.

Recent Legislative Attempts

The Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act

Introduced in 2001, the DREAM Act sought to provide undocumented minors brought to the U.S. as children with a pathway to legal status through education and military service (Gonzales, 2016). Despite wide public support, the bill has faced repeated congressional failures and ongoing judicial challenges, reflecting the contentiousness surrounding immigration reform.

The H-1B Visa Program

Established in 1990 and revised periodically, including significant updates in 2004 and 2008, the H-1B visa program allows U.S. companies to employ foreign workers in specialty occupations (USCIS, 2021). The program is often lauded for addressing labor shortages in tech and engineering fields, yet it has also faced criticism as it is exploited to suppress wages and displace domestic workers.

Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA)

In 2012, the Obama administration introduced the DACA program, which offered short-term relief from deportation for individuals who came to the U.S. as children (Sinha, 2016). DACA recipients, often referred to as "Dreamers," have become integral to the U.S. economy and society. However, the program has faced significant legal challenges, and its future remains uncertain, illustrating the precarious nature of immigration policy.

The Importance of Expanding Immigration Policy

Economic Contributions

Research illustrates that immigration directly contributes to economic growth (Peri, 2016). Studies suggest that expanding legal immigration pathways can not only bolster the labor force with necessary skills but also generate tax revenues that support social programs.

Humanitarian Responsibility

Additionally, America’s tradition as a refuge for those fleeing violence and persecution reinforces the moral imperative for an expanded immigration policy. With global displacement reaching unprecedented levels, U.S. policy should reflect commitment to humanitarian principles (Chishti, 2021).

Current Issues and Legislative Recommendations

The Impact of COVID-19

The ongoing effects of COVID-19 on labor markets heighten the urgency for immigration reform. While the pandemic has led to widespread job losses, sectors like agriculture, technology, and healthcare increasingly rely on immigrant labor to sustain operations (Center for American Progress, 2021).

Recommendations for Policy Expansion

1. Elimination of Quotas: Legislative efforts should focus on eradicating discriminatory quotas in immigration laws, thereby facilitating a more equitable framework for immigration (Cato Institute, 2021).
2. Pathway for Undocumented Immigrants: Provide a pathway for undocumented immigrants currently living in the U.S. to gain legal status, taking into account their contribution to society (American Progress, 2021).
3. Enhanced Visa Programs: Increase the allocation and access to work visas such as the H-1B program to attract highly skilled labor while ensuring safeguards against wage suppression (National Immigration Forum, 2021).

Conclusion

A progressive transformation of immigration policy is essential not only for the economy but for upholding America's commitment to being a refuge for the oppressed. The legislative history reflects a long and complex evolution that must now pivot to meet modern economic realities and a changing global landscape. By implementing the recommendations, the U.S. can solidify its role as a leader in immigration policy reform, ensuring it remains a beacon of hope and opportunity.

References

1. American Progress. (2021). Immigration and the Economy: Policy Recommendations. Retrieved from [www.americanprogress.org](https://www.americanprogress.org).
2. Cato Institute. (2021). Immigration Policy: Past, Present, and Future. Retrieved from [www.cato.org](https://www.cato.org).
3. Center for American Progress. (2021). The Economic Benefits of Immigration. Retrieved from [www.americanprogress.org](https://www.americanprogress.org).
4. Chishti, M. (2021). The Refugee Crisis: A Call to Action. Retrieved from [www.migrationpolicy.org](https://www.migrationpolicy.org).
5. Gonzales, R. G. (2016). Lives in Limbo: Undocumented and Coming of Age in America. University of California Press.
6. Martin, P. (2004). The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965: A Retrospective. Migration Information Source.
7. Massey, D. S., & Capoferro, C. (2008). Measuring Illegal Migration: Current Challenges and Future Opportunities. Migration Information Source.
8. National Immigration Forum. (2021). A Path Forward: Immigration Reform for the 21st Century. Retrieved from [www.immigrationforum.org](https://www.immigrationforum.org).
9. Ngai, M. M. (2004). Impossible Subjects: Illegal Aliens and the Making of Modern America. Princeton University Press.
10. USCIS. (2021). H-1B Specialty Occupations. Retrieved from [www.uscis.gov](https://www.uscis.gov).
---
This legislative history review provides a comprehensive analysis of immigration legislation and advocates for expanded policies to support the economic and humanitarian needs of the nation. It encompasses a thorough examination of historical contexts, current issues, and actionable recommendations crucial for effective immigration reform in the U.S.