State Opt-In for Existing Temporary Work Visas
This proposal would allow states to petition for temporary work visas based on their specific population and labor needs. Instead of requiring individual employers to conduct their own labor market tests, each participating state would assess statewide labor shortages, petition the federal government for a set number of temporary worker visas, and distribute those visas within the state in accordance with federal requirements.
The Case ForÂ
Supporters argue that the state opt-in model would increase the economic benefits by better placing foreign workers where there are real-time local shortages than the national caps do. They observe that some states have industries particularly reliant on temporary foreign labor. For example, California uses H-2A visas extensively for seasonal agricultural labor. Alaska, Maine, and Maryland rely heavily on the H-2B visas for their seafood processors. Proponents note that other states don’t face the same pressures. Advocates also reason that by making this an opt-in program, it is not a federal mandate. States that want to take the burden off individual employers and ensure labor market needs are met can do so. States where foreign labor would have a less positive impact because they face fewer labor shortages can avoid the additional state-administrative burden that would come with opting in.
The Case Against
Critics who oppose increasing employment-based immigration generally note that allowing states to petition for these visas would increase the total number of temporary work visas granted in the US. These opponents argue that it is a bad idea for the same safety and economic reasons they oppose other proposals that increase immigration. More specifically, opponents argue that eliminating individual employer labor market tests removes a key safeguard that protects American workers. They point out that while some industries in certain states may face broad labor shortages, there is still value in forcing each employer to first demonstrate, and repeatedly demonstrate each time, that they cannot find a qualified American worker to fill that specific position. They also argue that while there may be a localized shortage of US workers for those jobs, there may be US workers in other parts of the country who could be incentivized to move for the work, rather than hiring a foreign worker. In their view, allowing states to request more visas and eliminating employer-specific labor market tests could cause certain employers to overlook the native workforce in favor of cheaper labor from other countries.