Global Development: Views from the Center

 

Why I’m Thrilled the United States Has Stopped Excluding Haitians from Temporary Work Visas

January 19, 2012


I’m delighted to share the news that yesterday the U.S. government added Haiti to the list of more than 50 countries eligible to participate in the H-2 visa program for temporary and seasonal workers, ending a longstanding policy of excluding Haitians from America’s largest temporary employment-based visa program. This is wonderful news for Haitians and Americans. It has the potential to unlock hundreds of millions of dollars in new economic opportunity for Haitian workers and their families—at no cost to the U.S. or Haitian governments, and with no increase in overall U.S. immigration. It’s also a fine example of the power of research-based policy engagement to help foster shared global prosperity.

Owen Barder I say this with a bias, of course, since I’ve been closely involved in the research and in the subsequent efforts to find policy openings and identify allies for the change. In the process I learned a lot about turning ideas into action. I want to tell that story, partly because I’m proud of my role in a shared success, and partly because I think there may be lessons for others engaged in the difficult work of pushing for win-win policy in global development.

My interest in labor mobility as a poverty reduction tool dates to my boyhood, when I spent a summer in Mexico. I was astonished to discover that the man who fixed our toilet in Mexico City earned just a small fraction of what a man doing an identical job in the United States would earn. How could that be? How could location matter so much more than talent, effort, or character? Years later at CGD, Nancy Birdsall encouraged me to delve into the links between migration and economic development.

One early research output was a 2008 CGD working paper, Income per Natural: Measuring Development as if People Mattered More Than Places, co-authored with Harvard’s Lant Pritchett and later published in Population and Development Review. We showed that migration is one of the most important sources of poverty reduction for a large portion of the developing world. For example, we found that four out of five Haitians with income above a $10/day poverty line at U.S. prices—just one third of the U.S. “poverty” line—live outside of Haiti. In a subsequent paper Lant, Claudio Montenegro and I showed that a typical Haitian male working in the United States earns at least six times the real living standard he could earn in Haiti.

Related Content

In January 2010 our somewhat obscure academic research suddenly became highly topical when Port-au-Prince was flattened by the earthquake in which more than 150,000 people perished. Amid a global outpouring of goodwill towards Haiti that focused on food, medicine and money, I argued in the Washington Post that “to help Haiti’s earthquake victims, change U.S. immigration laws.” I noted that expatriate Haitians’ remittances to Haiti have long been much larger than foreign aid and that remittances go directly to needy Haitian families, unlike most aid. Next day, the Post followed with its own editorial urging that the United States welcome limited numbers of Haitians as part of the earthquake relief effort.

These suggestions sparked a virulent backlash, ranging from anti-immigrant activists and white supremacists, some directed at me personally, to the normally sober USA Today, which argued that the best way to foster economic growth in Haiti is to actively prevent the most capable people there from leaving (apply the same argument to New Orleans after hurricane Katrina, and you can see just how absurd it is).

Things might have ended there, except that I felt nagged by the expectations created by the second half of CGD’s tag line: “practical ideas for global prosperity.” Could we tap the post-quake outpouring of goodwill towards Haiti to increase Haitians’ opportunities to work in the United States, in a way that would not cost but even benefit the United States, despite the toxic nature of the U.S. national debate on migration?

With the generous support of the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, which also supported my research, I sought the help of two extraordinary experts—Sarah Williamson on humanitarian relief and Royce Murray on immigration law. I asked them to identify any changes in laws or regulations that would allow increased mobility and economic opportunity for small numbers of Haitians as part of the post-disaster relief effort, at little or no cost to the United States. They found many options for the administration and Congress (detailed here and summarized here), among them adding Haiti to the list of countries eligible for the H-2 temporary work visa program.

This was potentially a major opportunity. Last year, U.S. businesses employed 103,324 H-2 workers from 53 countries to do hard, dirty, and tedious temporary jobs that few Americans are willing to perform. Wages for these jobs, at about $20,000 per year, are low by U.S. standards but many times what the same workers could earn in Haiti. Working conditions in many H-2 jobs are difficult, but conditions are typically much worse in Haiti. Importantly, the decision about which countries are on the list is in the hands of administration officials, not Congress—eliminating the need for new legislation.

In spring 2011 we learned that the H-2 visa eligibility list is usually revised once a year, often in January. Could we influence such a decision simply by documenting and communicating facts about its consequences?

Guided by Sarah and Royce’s investigations into the rule-making process, and with the help of CGD policy outreach assistant Chris Molitoris, the four of us worked over the past six months to make the case for a change in meetings with opinion shapers and decision makers in the State Department, the Department of Homeland Security, the White House, Congress, the humanitarian aid community, the refugee community, and the Haiti advocacy community. Almost no one we spoke with in Washington, Miami, or Geneva knew that Haitians were excluded from America’s largest temporary visa program. Some experts told us we must be mistaken. A few tried to argue, like USA Today, that maintaining the ban was somehow beneficial to Haiti.

In most cases, however, we were delighted to find that once people knew about the exclusion and its consequences, they were receptive, even enthusiastic about making a change. A bi-partisan group of eight Florida senators and representatives wrote a letter to secretary of state Hillary Clinton and secretary of homeland security Janet Napolitano urging them to include Haiti on the H-2 visa list, citing CGD research. Faith-based and secular advocacy groups, ranging from the American Jewish World Service and the Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service to the Environmental Justice Initiative for Haiti sent a similar letter. The Miami Herald urged action in an editorial.

And to its enormous credit, yesterday the administration did the right thing and added Haiti to the list of H-2 eligible countries.

This seemingly tiny change has vast economic potential. Given the huge wage differences (an estimated $19,000 in additional annual income per Haitian worker), if just 2,000 Haitians are permitted to work as H-2 workers in the United States each year (just 2% of total H-2s), over the course of 10 years that’s $400 million in additional, new income for Haitian families. That’s equal in size to the entire U.S. post-earthquake budget for reconstruction in Haiti, most of which goes not to Haitians but to U.S. contractors. And the cost of H-2 workers to America is—nothing. U.S. employers pay H-2 workers not as charity but because each one adds more than $20,000 per year to their revenues. Far from taking public money, H-2 workers directly and indirectly generate positive U.S. tax revenue. Moreover, the H-2 visa is a temporary, nonimmigrant visa. This adds nothing to total immigration.

Ending Haiti’s H-2 visa exclusion is to my knowledge the first time in at least half a century that U.S. admission policy was changed, even in part, in response to increased need in the wake of a disaster. (There have been cases—including Haiti—where deportation policy was relaxed in response to a disaster.)

There are other important steps that have yet to be taken. These include expediting the admission of the numerous Haitians already approved for family-based U.S. permanent residency who are stuck on a 3-to-11 year waiting list, separated from their families and forced to live in a disaster zone. Roughly 16,000 of these are the husbands, wives, or young children of established, successful U.S. permanent residents. In the aftermath of a horrendous disaster, they should be permitted to await their green cards here in the United States, reunited with their families. A coalition of 95 members of Congress as well as numerous governors, mayors, city councils, and civil society organizations has asked the administration to take this sensible, exceptional step.

I’m thrilled with yesterday’s announcement. I’m also hopeful that the combination of elected officials, non-governmental organizations and senior U.S. officials who made the Haiti’s inclusion on the H-2 visa list possible will have similar success on expedited family reunification and other modest, limited measures that help Haitians and Americans at the same time.

Possibly Related Posts

  AddThis Social Bookmark Button


13 Responses to “Why I’m Thrilled the United States Has Stopped Excluding Haitians from Temporary Work Visas”

  1. David Roodman :
    January 19th, 2012 at 6:46 pm

    Michael, this is fantastic news. I admire your dedication to rigor and impact. One question: what can we say about the *net* impact of this policy change on people in poor countries? I.e., is there a fixed global quota, so that if more people come from Haiti, fewer will come from other poor countries? Or even if there is no quota, might similar effects occur through the working of the labor market?
    –David

  2. Michael Clemens :
    January 19th, 2012 at 7:00 pm

    Thanks David for this great question. There are two types of H-2 visa. There is no quota for H-2A visas, which are for agricultural work. There is a quota for H-2B visas, which are for non-agricultural jobs, often seasonal service jobs in tourism. In most recent years the latter quota gets filled.

    So for H-2B the composition of the eligible country list is usually irrelevant to the total number who come. For H-2A it’s complicated, but my guess is that adding Haiti to the list of eligible countries won’t substantially raise the total pool. The pool responds to employer demand for workers, and to the extent that employers are either indifferent between Haitians and others or actually prefer non-Haitians, changing the list doesn’t affect the pool.

    The only effect on the pool arises if there are employers who not only prefer Haitians, but also were holding back from hiring any H-2 worker until Haitians were available. While this might be the case for some Haitian-American or Francophone businesspeople, my guess is that for the jobs in question most employers would be indifferent about nationality as long as the work gets done.

    If this is true, then the effect on total H-2 access by people from LDCs due to whitelisting Haiti would be very small. But substitution between origin countries can be welfare-enhancing if, in economic terms, the marginal utility a Haitian gets from the opportunity is greater. Given Haiti’s extreme lack of economic opportunity even before the earthquake, plus the economic effects of the earthquake, plus the ongoing cholera outbreak (which has now touched hundreds of thousands), I’d be willing to bet that marginal utility for Haitians is the highest in our hemisphere. That opens up the possibility of numbers-neutral, welfare-enhancing substitution.

    All that said, I don’t know of good research on this that would give a rock-solid answer to the good question.

  3. Carolyn Y. :
    January 20th, 2012 at 11:00 am

    Congratulations on all your hard work paying off! I’m always happy to hear that borders are becoming more permeable– they’re not real to begin with. This article reminds me of a book I just finished reading, Coyotes by Ted Conover. (if anyone else who reads this article is interested in learning or reading more.)

  4. David Roodman :
    January 20th, 2012 at 12:33 pm

    Thanks, Michael. And I think there is another value to this achievement, which is intangible but potentially hugely important, which is the precedent it sets for formulating U.S. immigration policy as if development mattered. I hope this is the beginning of a long historical trend.

  5. Michael Woolcock :
    January 20th, 2012 at 4:35 pm

    Fantastic work, Michael — congratulations to you and your colleagues! This is the kind of evidence-based policy-making in development we should all celebrate and encourage.

    With the benefit of hindsight, it seems your team was able to deftly identify a particular opening for immigration reform that was technically possible, politically feasible, and amenable to solid research (the proverbial ‘sweet spot’!). In the course of your deliberations, has your team identified other such specific openings, around which targeted efforts are likely to have a high pay-off potential? More generally, using the criteria above to create some sort of list of ‘high potential for pro-development reform’ issues would be really useful for those of us at (or aspiring to be at) the policy-research nexus.

  6. Michael Clemens :
    January 20th, 2012 at 7:42 pm

    Thanks very much, Carolyn, for your kind words. For everyone else: The book that Carolyn refers to is at this link.

  7. Michael Clemens :
    January 23rd, 2012 at 4:48 pm

    Thanks very much for this comment, Michael, which goes to the heart of the matter.

    Your great suggestion was the writ for those at CGD who were asked to contribute to a volume called The White House and the World, though the attempt at close focus on the sweet spot is more successful in some parts of that book than others. My own chapter, for example, was less focused, and characterized types of policies that could be both beneficial and feasible, rather than delving into the level of detail we eventually arrived at on Haiti (i.e. take list X in document Y and add the word Z).

    On the (already narrow) question of how migration could cost-effectively enhance the post-disaster relief effort for Haiti, we do have a well-defined list of other highly effective, low-cost, feasible options, given here. But for development policy more generally the above book is our best effort so far, and only covers the U.S.

    I’d be very interested to know if other commenters know of works that undertake the prioritization that Michael Woolcock suggests.

  8. Kaci Farrell :
    January 24th, 2012 at 3:04 pm

    Congratulations Michael, Sarah, Royce and Chris! This is fantastic news made possible by your diligence and creative thinking. Keep up the great work!

  9. Michael Clemens :
    January 24th, 2012 at 5:37 pm

    …and also by the diligence and creative thinking of Kaci Farrell! You helped so much to get the ball rolling on this initiative in 2010, Kaci, and I’m delighted it worked out like this.

  10. Michael Bernstein :
    January 24th, 2012 at 6:02 pm

    Michael,

    Congratulations! This is great news and a wonderful tribute to your efforts.

    Reading this reminded me of how important and inspiring CGD’s work can be.

  11. Michael Clemens :
    January 25th, 2012 at 1:13 pm

    Thanks so much Michael, your own work is another example of ‘important and inspiring’.

  12. Nandini Oomman :
    January 31st, 2012 at 12:52 pm

    Michael-I just read this wonderful story. Given that I had an insider CGD perspective on your work, albeit from a distance, I see what good research, diligence, persistence and effective outreach can do! This is really a terrific outcome! Congrats!

  13. Lilianne C. :
    March 11th, 2012 at 11:57 pm

    Micheal

    For all you have done and if you wish for my help and if it’s possible that I can help let me know

    In any event some of my friend have been to many meeting of how to get some haitian out of Haiti rifgr now with H-2B as soon as possible to some of them I provide help with making copy of aplications needed and transportations for some. I’m too happy to help with this great United States helping some peoples in great need…

    Micheal you are a very smart and a great human person

    May God bless you

    Lckc

Post a Comment

We value frank and constructive exchanges and encourage you to use your real name in your comments.